Coolest/Ugliest Weapons V5 - Bullpup AKs are the best

[butre]

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41041366]
is there any kind of pistol that's known to be able to be modified at home to chamber a variety of rounds?.[/QUOTE]

glock 17 will go from 9mm to .40 s&w to .357 all day

[FoodStuffs]

sounds ideal.

you could practice with your preferred round whenever you needed to but if you ever just wanna goto the range and shoot you could convert it to take a much less expensive round.

i'm guessing the FNP is also able to be converted?

[SuperToaster]

That's pretty much what I do with my Sig P229, just switch my barrel from .357 Sig to .40sw whenever I go to the range.

Very useful.

[Trunk Monkay]

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41041297]i guess the only reason why i'd get that gun and round would be for the piercing capability of the bullet and its cartridge. you know for the zombies wearing ballistic helmets.

if i'd go with a little bullet it would have to be 357 sig though. that's a sexy round. it's got a nice load of powder behind it. and from what i can see with hollowpoints they're pretty good, and can be loaded with FMJ as well, and i'd imagine that it would have really good armor piercing capability.

chamber that slavic piece in 357 sig and i'd bite. hard.

but really the only reason in my mind why you'd need a piece that could pierce armor would be if you don't trust your government.

we also need more 9mm rifle rounds that aren't subsonic... are there any such rifles?[/QUOTE]

Don't know why you would want a TT in such a modern round. It's single stack, single action, and most models didn't even have safeties.

[FoodStuffs]

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;41041439]Don't know why you would want a TT in such a modern round. It's single stack, single action, and most models didn't even have safeties.[/QUOTE]

rule of cool? it's not like i'd actually buy one, i'd just think it would be sexier. also the smaller round does make for a larger magazine size as well i understand all that. this is just in my own little imagination dream world.

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/11290600091.jpg/300px-11290600091.jpg[/img]

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7e/P229_blk.jpg/800px-P229_blk.jpg[/img]

side by side i think the choice is quite obvious when you step back and look at them both...

[SuperToaster]

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;41041439]Don't know why you would want a TT in such a modern round. It's single stack, single action, and most models didn't even have safeties.[/QUOTE]

And when they do, they're awful

It's more of a fun, plinking gun that you keep for its niceties; by no means should be used to carry

And it all depends on your size, I'm a smaller guy (5 foot 6 inches at 18)

So the Sig P229 was a pretty clear-cut choice for me.

[FoodStuffs]

the 229 is compact while still looking like it means business.

the FNP just looks awkward.

[SuperToaster]

You won't regret getting the P229, hella accurate and very smooth

Probably one of my favourite guns in possession

But if you're wanting something a little more fullsized the P226 also comes in .40, .357 Sig and 9mm.

[URL]http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductDetails/p226.aspx[/URL]

or the P250 Full size; comes in 9mm, .40, .357 Sig, and .45

[URL]http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductDetails/p250-full-size.aspx[/URL]

[FoodStuffs]

eh the fullsized just look like they'd feel awkward.

cannons are nice but a compact little piece like a walther ppk is much nicer in my opinion. better handling all around. also i've got big hands, so even better.

[img]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/handguns/germany/hg13/1287733452.jpg[/img]

it looks like it could be an extension of one's hand

whereas with something like this

[img]http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/filepicker%2FFU8rEbCzTovrJxFRAGAB_1333993296260.jpg[/img]

it looks like you'd be waving an oversized stapler around.

i'd rather it be lighter and compact. much easier. especially with big nimble hands.

[SuperToaster]

[URL]http://www.sigsauer.com/Catalog/pistols.aspx[/URL]

Sig makes dozens of pistols, most of them either being made strictly compact or the full-sized versions having their own compact version.

[FoodStuffs]

the m11-a1 looks quite sleek

[img]http://www.sigsauer.com/upFiles/catalog/product/M11-A1-detail-Hero.jpg[/img]

[asteroidrules]

And meanwhile I'm just sitting here looking at Glocks
[img]http://www.imfdb.org/images/0/05/Glock32.jpg[/img]

[SuperToaster]

I'm considering getting a Glock, but I dunno, they all look the same so making a decision is kinda difficult

Might get the Glock 22, mainly for the .40SW calibre it shoots. Any reason not to?

[Trunk Monkay]

[QUOTE=EvilMattress;41041946]I'm considering getting a Glock, but I dunno, they all look the same so making a decision is kinda difficult

Might get the Glock 22, mainly for the .40SW calibre it shoots. Any reason not to?[/QUOTE]

Glock 31.

[dwt110]

can someone explain to me the thought process behind .45 GAP

[Trunk Monkay]

[QUOTE=dwt110;41041997]can someone explain to me the thought process behind .45 GAP[/QUOTE]

There isn't one.

[SuperToaster]

[QUOTE=dwt110;41041997]can someone explain to me the thought process behind .45 GAP[/QUOTE]

[URL]http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?1983-45ACP-vs-45GAP&p=35579&viewfull=1#post35579[/URL]

or

[URL]http://www.shootingtimes.com/2011/01/04/ammunition_new_45/[/URL]

[Notrabies]

Glock 34 for best looking Glock:
[IMG]http://www.weapon.ge/images/485_3.jpg[/IMG]

[R-money]

-Snip-

[asteroidrules]

[img]http://www.imfdb.org/images/2/2b/G27.jpg[/img]

Subcompacts are cuter.

[Download]

[QUOTE=dwt110;41041997]can someone explain to me the thought process behind .45 GAP[/QUOTE]

It's higher pressure than the .45ACP while being shorter than the .45ACP enabling it to be chambered in the smaller framed Glock (i.e the same frame as the 9mm, 357SIG and 40S&W)

[editline]15th June 2013[/editline]

Anyone know why Glock Doesn't make a Compact gun in 10mm Auto? They make full sized and subcompact guns but no compact guns

[butre]

[QUOTE=dwt110;41041997]can someone explain to me the thought process behind .45 GAP[/QUOTE]

.45 caliber projectile in 9mm frame. it's actually a very good round to shoot

[editline]15th June 2013[/editline]

[QUOTE=download;41042238]It's higher pressure than the .45ACP while being shorter than the .45ACP enabling it to be chambered in the smaller framed Glock (i.e the same frame as the 9mm, 357SIG and 40S&W)

[editline]15th June 2013[/editline]

Anyone know why Glock Doesn't make a Compact gun in 10mm Auto? They make full sized and subcompact guns but no compact guns[/QUOTE]

do they have a .45 compact? if not, that's why. 10mm and .45 glocks use the same frame

[Download]

Yep, no 45ACP compact either. Seems like a poor choice to me

[Trunk Monkay]

It's not like 10mm is a very compact round to begin with.

[Download]

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;41042458]It's not like 10mm is a very compact round to begin with.[/QUOTE]

But they already make a subcompact version that's smaller than a compact

[urbanmonkey]

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;41042235][img]http://www.imfdb.org/images/2/2b/G27.jpg[/img]

Subcompacts are cuter.[/QUOTE]

My dad has one of these, I absolutely hate it. He has a pinkie finger extension or whatever on a few of his magazines but I still don't like the thing.

[Richard Longflop]

I still think revolvers are the sexiest class of handguns.

[t]http://25.media.tumblr.com/828e5012a40824a60307367ad0201e13/tumblr_mesnvbDoGl1rk9wf0o1_1280.jpg[/t]
[t]http://smith-wessonforum.com/members/doc44-albums-44-magnums-picture117-class-b-engraved-virginia-leblanc-june-1956.jpg[/t]
[t]http://www.civilwarmall.com/bookseller/images/22-1040B.jpg[/t]
[t]http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/7482/8787696_4.jpg?v=8CC7EC195DC54B0[/t]

[Taggart]

Technically revolvers are not pistols; Revolvers are handguns, which pistols are also a subset of.

The distinguishing identifier of a pistol is a single chamber integral with the barrel; one type of revolver, the Pepperbox Revolver, fits this bill, but other revolvers do not count due to having multiple chambers located in the cylinder.

The more you know!

[Richard Longflop]

[QUOTE=Taggart;41044740]Technically revolvers are not pistols; Revolvers are handguns, which pistols are also a subset of.

The distinguishing identifier of a pistol is a single chamber integral with the barrel; one type of revolver, the Pepperbox Revolver, fits this bill, but other revolvers do not count due to having multiple chambers located in the cylinder.

The more you know![/QUOTE]

Thanks, changed it.

[dass]

[img]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/handguns/russia/revolver/1287753538.jpg[/img]
You can't talk about revolvers without posting this thing