[QUOTE=PrusseLusken;50274815]people say cock on close is great but i can't stand it.. i feel like there is something wrong when closing the bolt, like it's chambering an out of spec round, and makes me stop to think what's possibly fucked up[/QUOTE]
I don't mind it with Enfields, but I hate it on the Arisakas...
In fact, I love it on my M1917 and I enjoy cock on open for my M39; I can run both quickly without issue.
The LSAT program finally got an update
[t]http://i.imgur.com/FJFhgz2.png[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/TL2cDZk.png[/t]
It looks like the US Army is taking a look at replacing both 5.56 and 7.62 with 6.5 Cased Telescoped ammo
[t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/rqvvgmY.png[/t][t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/wV5UVry.png[/t]
[url]http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016armament/18325_Phillips.pdf[/url]
[QUOTE=StrykerE;50281894]The LSAT program finally got an update
[t]http://i.imgur.com/FJFhgz2.png[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/TL2cDZk.png[/t]
It looks like the US Army is taking a look at replacing both 5.56 and 7.62 with 6.5 Cased Telescoped ammo
[t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/rqvvgmY.png[/t][t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/wV5UVry.png[/t]
[url]http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016armament/18325_Phillips.pdf[/url][/QUOTE]
going to be a colossal waste of money...
[url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/05/08/lsat-6-5mm-plastic-cased-ammo-armys-next-small-arms-program/[/url]
[QUOTE=MAC21500;50282163]going to be a colossal waste of money...
[url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/05/08/lsat-6-5mm-plastic-cased-ammo-armys-next-small-arms-program/[/url][/QUOTE]
Someone in the comments who attended the presentation made an interesting comment
[QUOTE]
Correct. I listened to the presentation and the decision to use the same case for the 6.5mm as the 7.62mm was driven by the convenience of being able to just switch barrels when testing the carbine and LMG in both calibres. The 6.5mm case is therefore bigger than it needs to be.
Incidentally, the presenter made a couple of relevant remarks I noted:
First, about the 5.56mm LSAT which is no longer being worked on:
"feedback was that 'it weighs less but doesn't do any more'"
Second, on the 6.5mm CT compared with the 7.62mm:
"so much more additional capability…..no point in using 7.62mm"
The 6.5CT is clearly seen as the optimum calibre for future squad weapons, replacing both the 5.56mm and 7.62mm. The system weight of the 6.5CT LMG and ammo is about the same as the 5.56mm M249, but the long-range performance betters the 7.62mm.
The performance at 1200m is clearly of relevance to a tripod-mounted MG, the effective range of other weapons chambered for the cartridge will depend on various factors.
What came across clearly in the presentations from the Army was that advanced rangefinder/ballistic computer sights are currently the top priority in small arms. Another one they're looking at (rather more into the future) is a stabilised gun to cancel out the usual "firing shake". The aim of both of these developments is to get the actual combat hit probabilities closer to the capabilities of the weapon and ammunition.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not convinced trying to replace 7.62 and 5.56mm with on cartridge is a good idea. There's a reason attempts have failed before.
Exactly. The last thing the US needs to do is spend a shitton of money on yet another small military upgrade.
replace everything with .22lr
[QUOTE=download;50283627]I'm not convinced trying to replace 7.62 and 5.56mm with on cartridge is a good idea. There's a reason attempts have failed before.[/QUOTE]
If you have read any of Nathaniel F's other articles on a general purpose cartridge, his main gripe is increased weight for minor ballistic returns.
So I'm trying to find a good safariland drop leg for my Glock 20 with the TLR-1 on it, it's going to be for when I'm out at the lease so I have a sidearm at all times.
I just don't know what to look for in drop legs and theres about 3-5 different models.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;50283867]I'm not convenced because i'm willing to bet we keep the m4/m16 platform, and m240 until there are just massive advances in projectile weapon technology. Just because it makes no sense to upgrade to a weapon that's only slightly better.[/QUOTE]
Well there's a weapon that's slightly better, but as a platform to service it may be substantially better. Caseless ammo means less parts in the weapon, less components in the ammunition to manufacture, and potentially more ammo in a combat load for a soldier for a given weight. Logistically while it might cost a lot up front in time it would be less expensive as the components and manufacturing catch up to the economy of scale.
The biggest thing is creating a reliable caseless ammunition, which from there could be adapted to M16's/M249 using simplified parts. That would ease the transition in terms of weapons while advancing the new form of ammunition.
[QUOTE=Zerokateo;50284080]So I'm trying to find a good safariland drop leg for my Glock 20 with the TLR-1 on it, it's going to be for when I'm out at the lease so I have a sidearm at all times.
I just don't know what to look for in drop legs and theres about 3-5 different models.[/QUOTE]
Does it have to be a safariland?
Check these out:
[url]http://www.kt-mech.com/models/GLK21.html[/url]
Drop leg rig:
[url]http://www.kt-mech.com/03Parts_dropleg.html[/url]
[QUOTE=MAC21500;50284290]Does it have to be a safariland?
Check these out:
[url]http://www.kt-mech.com/models/GLK21.html[/url]
Drop leg rig:
[url]http://www.kt-mech.com/03Parts_dropleg.html[/url][/QUOTE]
Not necessarily, I was just thinking of safariland because of the lock system, anything that will hold the gun in place while walking through brush and branches works for me.
Was also thinking of the "What if" scenario where I fall off the quad that we use to ride around ( cause it's almost happened before ) and was thinking that I really wouldn't want my gun falling out.
Why 6.5mm? They're thinking too small!
Replace all squad based weapons with firearms chambered in 12.7x108mm
[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;50284441]Why 6.5mm? They're thinking too small!
Replace all squad based weapons with firearms chambered in 12.7x108mm[/QUOTE]
Joking aside it's because of it's ballistic coefficient. 6.5mm bullets naturally have an amazing ballistic coefficent, hell anything between 6mm and 7mm typically outclasses your larger and smaller rounds in that regard. That's part of the reason why they were looking at 6.5 grendal and 6.8 spc. It's also the reason a lot of F class shooters tend to use 6mm/6.5mm rounds. A lot of my customers who shoot F class use 6.5 Creedmoor, and my armorer whose been building and shooting AR's for over 30 years made a 6.5 Grendel as a 1000yd rifle.
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;50284006]replace everything with .22lr[/QUOTE]
Let's go even further; .22 Short
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;50284095]Well there's a weapon that's slightly better, but as a platform to service it may be substantially better. Caseless ammo means less parts in the weapon, less components in the ammunition to manufacture, and potentially more ammo in a combat load for a soldier for a given weight. Logistically while it might cost a lot up front in time it would be less expensive as the components and manufacturing catch up to the economy of scale.
The biggest thing is creating a reliable caseless ammunition, which from there could be adapted to M16's/M249 using simplified parts. That would ease the transition in terms of weapons while advancing the new form of ammunition.[/QUOTE]
I'm doubtful caseless means less weapon parts. You still need parts to extract dud, damaged or dirty rounds.
[editline]9th May 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;50284634]Joking aside it's because of it's ballistic coefficient. 6.5mm bullets naturally have an amazing ballistic coefficent, hell anything between 6mm and 7mm typically outclasses your larger and smaller rounds in that regard. That's part of the reason why they were looking at 6.5 grendal and 6.8 spc. It's also the reason a lot of F class shooters tend to use 6mm/6.5mm rounds. A lot of my customers who shoot F class use 6.5 Creedmoor, and my armorer whose been building and shooting AR's for over 30 years made a 6.5 Grendel as a 1000yd rifle.[/QUOTE]
But does the benefit outweigh adding 20 or 30% onto the weight of ammunition?
Sorry gatpunch, life's been busy and I'm stuck at the beginning of busy season for work. But, I was prepared to come back with pretty new gat pictures with my tax returns, but adulted hard and put my refund into my car payment and knocked it down substantially.
How are you guys? Anything new and cool I missed?
[QUOTE=Zerokateo;50284080]So I'm trying to find a good safariland drop leg for my Glock 20 with the TLR-1 on it, it's going to be for when I'm out at the lease so I have a sidearm at all times.
I just don't know what to look for in drop legs and theres about 3-5 different models.[/QUOTE]
So after some research time and realizing how awkward it is to use a drop leg holster under normal circumstances ( I'm not wearing body armor or anything that will restrict my waist draw, like ever )
I decided I'm just going to get a nice belt and belt holster. Still really leaning towards safariland though, I'm just not big on the look of Kydex. I like the synthetic leather they make and it would make me look more normal when open carrying here in Texas.
Also yay, 5,000 posts and it's about guns. What a dream come true.
Thinking of getting a Nikon Monarch 3 4-16x42 to replace the Nikko-Stirling on my Howa. Should I even bother? The issue that I had with it on 16x zoom the Nikon seems to have too (that being it has no room for play for where your head is), and if I do, do I get the mil-dot reticle or the BDC reticle? The gun's .223 and I got it for both coyote hunting and target shooting.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;50294300]Thinking of getting a Nikon Monarch 3 4-16x42 to replace the Nikko-Stirling on my Howa. Should I even bother? The issue that I had with it on 16x zoom the Nikon seems to have too (that being it has no room for play for where your head is), and if I do, do I get the mil-dot reticle or the BDC reticle? The gun's .223 and I got it for both coyote hunting and target shooting.[/QUOTE]
I've got a Monarch 6-24x50 and it's great; yes, at 24x it doesn't give you a lot of room for head movement.
I like the idea of BDC, but I don't like how Nikon's reticle is done with the open circles, so I'd probably go for the mil dot.
[QUOTE=Zerokateo;50294246]So after some research time and realizing how awkward it is to use a drop leg holster under normal circumstances ( I'm not wearing body armor or anything that will restrict my waist draw, like ever )
I decided I'm just going to get a nice belt and belt holster. Still really leaning towards safariland though, I'm just not big on the look of Kydex. I like the synthetic leather they make and it would make me look more normal when open carrying here in Texas.
Also yay, 5,000 posts and it's about guns. What a dream come true.[/QUOTE]
My safariland leather duty holster for my 4506 is solid as hell.
Can you cut the barrel down? There's pretty much no reason to have more than a 16" barrel on a .22lr.
[QUOTE=download;50298702]Can you cut the barrel down? There's pretty much no reason to have more than a 16" barrel on a .22lr.[/QUOTE]
I am going to guess it actually makes it more accurate since the bullet slows down in the barrel enough not to be supersonic, thus the bullet doesn't begin to tumble when falling through the transonic zone. But it still looks hilarious.
[QUOTE=PrusseLusken;50298786]longer barrel on .22lr = lower muzzle velocity
the closer to no sound I get with standard ammo, the better. i shoot only standard velocity ammo and everything is subsonic in my barrel, no use shooting supersonic/high velocity as those are only less accurate as the bullet goes through the transsonic zone.
thing is incredibly accurate as is (<5mm ten-round groups center-to-center with cci standard at 50m), if i had the barrel cut i'd be having a nervous breakdown about any possible reduction in accuracy
a friend had his enormously accurate våpensmia vsm004 cut down by the local professional gunsmith. it went from being a tack driver, to a de facto shotgun, after the front dioptre was taken off and the barrel cut like 4cm and threaded. won't risk anything happening to mine, the length is okay enough on the range.
only issue is if i take it hunting but i might get another cheap .22lr at some point and get it integrally suppressed.
[editline]11th May 2016[/editline]
basically what sirkillsalot said![/QUOTE]
Taking a little over an inch and a half shouldn't mess with the accuracy that much unless the barrel was shorter to begin with. I suppose the only way to know for sure is to try shooting some subsonics through it and compare the accuracy to the standards. I'm willing to bet it has more to deal with how the crown was cut, because even with the trannsic zone it shouldn't affect accuracy that much unless you're shooting past 25 yards/metres. This is of course assuming that it's not just going a hair over the speed of sound when it leaves the barrel.
I can't figure out why my Remington M10 recoils so hard. It really, really hurts no matter what. I assumed it was because it's light (it feels like a feather for its size) but it turns out it's quite a bit heavier than the Moss 500s I have no problems with and even half a pound heavier than the 870. I can't imagine what would make this otherwise ordinary pump gun kick like a fucking horse, but it's bad enough that I ended up putting a recoil pad on it.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50299487]I can't figure out why my Remington M10 recoils so hard. It really, really hurts no matter what. I assumed it was because it's light (it feels like a feather for its size) but it turns out it's quite a bit heavier than the Moss 500s I have no problems with and even half a pound heavier than the 870. I can't imagine what would make this otherwise ordinary pump gun kick like a fucking horse, but it's bad enough that I ended up putting a recoil pad.[/QUOTE]
A lot of its ergonomics. I had a 500 that I could shoot no problem with a modern poly stock. One of my co-workers had one with a wood stock that was shaped a bit differently. Now granted the style of recoil pads were different, but that said his seemed to kick harder. How the stock imparts recoil into the shoulder is part of what makes it "kick", same idea as to why a lot of rifles have their stocks inline with the bore these days
That could be it - the stock is swept downward fairly aggressively compared to the plastic stocks I've seen, so it's probably got a rather significant snap.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/S3pVDh4.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50299487]I can't figure out why my Remington M10 recoils so hard. It really, really hurts no matter what. I assumed it was because it's light (it feels like a feather for its size) but it turns out it's quite a bit heavier than the Moss 500s I have no problems with and even half a pound heavier than the 870. I can't imagine what would make this otherwise ordinary pump gun kick like a fucking horse, but it's bad enough that I ended up putting a recoil pad on it.[/QUOTE]
Recoild is also dependant with where the barrel is lined up. For example, a Chiappa Rhino has significantly reduced felt recoil because the barrel is on a lower axis and is loned up with your wrist, so the recoil pushes almost straight back rather than up. Same thing with the M10. The barrel is above your shoulder so the felt recoil will be a lot nore aggressive
My C96 has a high bore axis so I know how that can cause the barrel to want to flip, just had no idea it could amplify felt recoil to that degree... really makes the M10 into a bruiser.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;50300987]Recoild is also dependant with where the barrel is lined up. For example, a Chiappa Rhino has significantly reduced felt recoil because the barrel is on a lower axis and is loned up with your wrist, so the recoil pushes almost straight back rather than up. Same thing with the M10. The barrel is above your shoulder so the felt recoil will be a lot nore aggressive[/QUOTE]
It's also one of the reasons most AR-15s don't deliver much recoil. The bore axis is almost in-line with your shoulder when you fire it.
The dinky round also helps.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
