Fantastic Firearms Part 2 - General

[QUOTE=Wittmann;16200345]Maybe the FN Minimi?[/QUOTE] Already did it. I think I might have forgotten to move it to the front page though.

[QUOTE=nunu;16197239]That was a good article. Never knew they were used in the spanish civil war. Also can you confirm this is real? I saw a gif where an american humvee was speeding along and some guys (probably insurgents) jumped out by the side of the road and threw a molotov at it. The vehicle didn't set on fire. It blew up. Rather shocking, but, how did that happen? Did it ignite the gas tank?[/QUOTE] I think the gas tanks on war Humvee's are well protected, especially with all the urban warfare modifications being done to the vehicle fleet ( not official military modifications, mind you; individual platoons request armor plating and such to stick on their vehicles ). I guess by random chance it [i]could[/i] have ignited the gas tank, or there could have been something very flammable just inside.

Yeah I forgot to move the Minimi to the front page. It is renumbered as 73 and on the front page right now.

Bean-O, done the M240B yet?

[QUOTE=Guardian-Angel;16202168]Bean-O, done the M240B yet?[/QUOTE] I have done the FN MAG. It's in the old thread.

[QUOTE=Guardian-Angel;16202168]Bean-O, done the M240B yet?[/QUOTE] yeah, the para is pretty good in zombie survivl so its prolly god in real lfe

[QUOTE=professional;16189652]1. Same thing 2. Already covered Wow you're probably the only one who read that post, everyone else was like "BAWW TLDR". But yeah, if you can get copy, get it. Great work.[/QUOTE] The LR-300 is actually a gas piston AR, it uses a modified system of the AR-15's direct impingement gas system, and is lightweight and accurate. They cost something like 7 grand apiece and nobody's adopted them yet, though. And if I remember correctly, the name stands for something like Long Range Rifle good for 300 meters.

[QUOTE=AlphaZulu;16202478]The LR-300 is actually a gas piston AR, it uses a modified system of the AR-15's direct impingement gas system, and is lightweight and accurate. They cost something like 7 grand apiece and nobody's adopted them yet, though. And if I remember correctly, the name stands for something like Long Range Rifle good for 300 meters.[/QUOTE] That's the annoying thing about how everyone is obsessed with carbines. They call that "super accurate" which they are, within 300 yards. The full-size rifles can do 500 easy. They just don't get the respect they deserve.

Req: FG-42

[QUOTE=Corewarp3;16202554]Req: FG-42[/QUOTE] Just a quick look at it makes it seem like a hell of a lot of recoil for such a small gun. I don't see how paratroopers would want that much recoil.

[QUOTE=thirty9th;16201917]I think the gas tanks on war Humvee's are well protected, especially with all the urban warfare modifications being done to the vehicle fleet ( not official military modifications, mind you; individual platoons request armor plating and such to stick on their vehicles ). I guess by random chance it [i]could[/i] have ignited the gas tank, or there could have been something very flammable just inside.[/QUOTE] Maybe, it was just so random when it suddenly explodes in mid air.

[QUOTE=Bean-O;16202530]That's the annoying thing about how everyone is obsessed with carbines. They call that "super accurate" which they are, within 300 yards. The full-size rifles can do 500 easy. They just don't get the respect they deserve.[/QUOTE] But Z-M weapons made a fullsize, and the current owner of the LR-300 design still makes a fullsize version. :\

[QUOTE=Corewarp3;16202554]Req: FG-42[/QUOTE] toobad it wasn't a fantastic firearm.

[QUOTE=AlphaZulu;16203353]But Z-M weapons made a fullsize, and the current owner of the LR-300 design still makes a fullsize version. :\[/QUOTE] Yeah I know, but people don't pay as much attention to those. They're all obsessed with the shorter ones. There's also the issue of rifle "Pistols".The ones that don't have stocks so that they can get around the class 3 SBR rigamaroll. I don't think ZM made any but every time someone else offers a pistol variant of their semi-automatic rifles it seems that everyone jizzes their pants in spite of the fact that those "pistols" are actually not as good as the normal-sized rifles.

[QUOTE=Kman1;16197467]In the Weaboo thread, there were too many people fighting over which is better AK-47 or M16. If an argument ever starts like that, just show this: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0[/url] Back on topic, the original Winchester 1894.[/QUOTE] That video is a complete fabrication

[QUOTE=PenisColada;16167769]it's like a glock that someone poo'd on [editline]09:01PM[/editline] AKA boring and gey[/QUOTE] Except it's better made, more reliable, and more accurate. Take the 2 pistols down, by normal field stripping, and look at the internals. In the XD you'll find large forged steel pieces and in the glock you'll find thin stamped steel pinned into plastic. As far as the bore axis making muzzle flip worse. Bullshit. The grip angle the XD offers over the glock makes recoil much more manageable. My XD40tac is easier to take follow up shots with than my friend's glock 17. I like his 17 as far as looks, I just hate how it feels and shoots.

[QUOTE=AlphaZulu;16202478]The LR-300 is actually a gas piston AR, it uses a modified system of the AR-15's direct impingement gas system, and is lightweight and accurate. They cost something like 7 grand apiece and nobody's adopted them yet, though. And if I remember correctly, the name stands for something like Long Range Rifle good for 300 meters.[/QUOTE] What? No it's not. It's still direct impingement operated, it's just modified so that it removes the need for a buffer tube, Therefore, you can have a folding stock on the LR300. Still the same thing.

[QUOTE=Bean-O;16178597]Arguably they're still useless because like he said it takes almost completely perfect marksmanship to pull that off. Most people simply can't do that.[/QUOTE] Not to mention he's forgetting the fact that over 50 yards a pistol's bullet is losing so much energy it's not going to be effective any more. Unless it's something that's moving exceptionally fast. For example, a 45acp at 100 yards isn't as effective as a 9mm at 100 yards.

[QUOTE=DrMortician;16208395]Not to mention he's forgetting the fact that over 50 yards a pistol's bullet is losing so much energy it's not going to be effective any more. Unless it's something that's moving exceptionally fast. For example, a 45acp at 100 yards isn't as effective as a 9mm at 100 yards.[/QUOTE] Yeah but you can kill someone with .45ACP just by chucking the bullet at their head :v: hurf durf

Does the Benelli M3 fit into the category of Fantastic Firearms? [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5uHt4AwYb4[/media]

[QUOTE=professional;16208501]Yeah but you can kill someone with .45ACP just by chucking the bullet at their head :v: hurf durf[/QUOTE] The ideal of a 230gr bullet from a semi-automatic handgun seems silly to me now. When it's hitting 900fps from the .45acp, my .454 will drive a 240gr bullet over 2000fps. I'd rather shoot a 40gr bullet at 2000fps or a 155gr bullet at 1400. My logic is just fast+light=explosive energy=better. The other school of thought says a heavy bullet is better. I just know I'm a lot more scared of something that makes an explosion on impact than punches a hole.

[QUOTE=DrMortician;16208874]The ideal of a 230gr bullet from a semi-automatic handgun seems silly to me now. When it's hitting 900fps from the .45acp, my .454 will drive a 240gr bullet over 2000fps. I'd rather shoot a 40gr bullet at 2000fps or a 155gr bullet at 1400. My logic is just fast+light=explosive energy=better. The other school of thought says a heavy bullet is better. I just know I'm a lot more scared of something that makes an explosion on impact than punches a hole.[/QUOTE] I would think a heavier bullet going slower would retain more energy then a light bullet going fast. I know i'm going to sound like a fucking retard comparing this to airsoft, but think about it like this. If a .28g was shot, its going to fly further for longer in comparsion to a .20 shot from the same spring because the air resistance has more of an affect on the faster lighter bullet.

Well, if it adds anything to this debate, let's use some math: Momentum = mass x velocity The faster you can get a bullet going while STILL RETAINING its mass, the more impact you get. In short, you're trading weight for speed unless you scale the whole equation, meaning you have to use a larger amount of propellant. In conclusion, if you have two theoretical bullets: One with mass 1/2x and velocity x, and the other mass x and velocity 1/2x, they have the same momentum and therefore roughly the same "stopping power".

[QUOTE=thirty9th;16209501]Well, if it adds anything to this debate, let's use some math: Momentum = mass x velocity The faster you can get a bullet going while STILL RETAINING its mass, the more impact you get. In short, you're trading weight for speed unless you scale the whole equation, meaning you have to use a larger amount of propellant. In conclusion, if you have two theoretical bullets: One with mass 1/2x and velocity x, and the other mass x and velocity 1/2x, they have the same momentum and therefore roughly the same "stopping power".[/QUOTE] yes, but the bullet with 1/2 x mass may not impart all of it's momentum at close range(go through target) While the bullet with 1/2x velocity is more likely to impart it's full impact.

[QUOTE=thirty9th;16209501]Well, if it adds anything to this debate, let's use some math: Momentum = mass x velocity The faster you can get a bullet going while STILL RETAINING its mass, the more impact you get. In short, you're trading weight for speed unless you scale the whole equation, meaning you have to use a larger amount of propellant. In conclusion, if you have two theoretical bullets: One with mass 1/2x and velocity x, and the other mass x and velocity 1/2x, they have the same momentum and therefore roughly the same "stopping power".[/QUOTE] Except since we're dealing with soft tissues and soft metals/fragmenting metals, that doesn't work out with a calculator. A fast, light bullet will rapidly expand and fragment. Causing massive trauma. A slow, heavy bullet will punch a hole and maintain its momentum, yielding deeper penetration but little to no expansion or fragmentation. Beyond that is where your calculator comes into play. Balancing between penetration and explosive energy for an optimal range is what you want. Basically fast and light but still able to reach vital organs is going to be the most effective stopper. Try bowling with an 8 pound ball, then try it with a 15 pound ball, and tell me which has a more impressive effect on the pins.

[QUOTE=DrMortician;16210056] Try bowling with an 8 pound ball, then try it with a 15 pound ball, and tell me which has a more impressive effect on the pins.[/QUOTE] If I may also use an analogy, I'll use professional boxers as an example. We'll use welterweights vs Heavyweights: Welters often have far more speed, and thus far more velocity in their punches, which produces an impressive bang or snapping sound on pads. Heavyweights on the other hand, are obviously slower, and their punches often are much lower in velocity, and their snaps on the pads aren't as impressive. However, the amount of energy and force the Heavyweights produce is terrific and the result is the guy holding the pads has trouble holding the pads :v: There is something to be said for a heavier larger object.

[QUOTE=professional;16210183]If I may also use an analogy, I'll use professional boxers as an example. We'll use welterweights vs Heavyweights: Welters often have far more speed, and thus far more velocity in their punches, which produces an impressive bang or snapping sound on pads. Heavyweights on the other hand, are obviously slower, and their punches often are much lower in velocity, and their snaps on the pads aren't as impressive. However, the amount of energy and force the Heavyweights produce is terrific and the result is the guy holding the pads has trouble holding the pads :v: There is something to be said for a heavier larger object.[/QUOTE] Well, here's what light and fast fragmenting bullets do: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdSkdXCgDH4[/media] Go shoot them with a slow moving .45 and you'll punch a hole without doing much.

[QUOTE=DrMortician;16210509]Well, here's what light and fast fragmenting bullets do: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdSkdXCgDH4[/media] Go shoot them with a slow moving .45 and you'll punch a hole without doing much.[/QUOTE] Thats completely different, you're comparing a intermediate rifle cartridge to a pistol cartridge. The amount of propellant behind that .223 is substantially more. Do that same experiment with a 7.62x51 and you'll get better results.

[QUOTE=professional;16210685]Thats completely different, you're comparing a intermediate rifle cartridge to a pistol cartridge. The amount of propellant behind that .223 is substantially more. Do that same experiment with a 7.62x51 and you'll get better results.[/QUOTE] Yea, the .223 has roughly 3 times the power.

[QUOTE=professional;16210685]Thats completely different, you're comparing a intermediate rifle cartridge to a pistol cartridge. The amount of propellant behind that .223 is substantially more. Do that same experiment with a 7.62x51 and you'll get better results.[/QUOTE] Well, yes and no. The 7.62x51 is still moving like a bat out of hell. The best comparison would be a 7.62x39 vs the 9x39mm. But really you're entirely missing the point on that. Those fragmenting bullets are still going to create a pretty decent explosion even down to the muzzle energy offered by the 5.7x28mm they'll just lack the same level of penetration.