[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;19787273]Well then you're an idiot who has probably only fired guns owned by someone else and you clearly have no respect for guns at all. I own everything from a .22 up to a .75 and everything in between, including a few you've probably never seen fired in person, and own more than a dozen firearms and have fired every single one of them, I know my shit and I maintain that jumping up to a large military caliber for a first gun is a mistake that takes a lot of time to repair. Anyone with a measure of shooting experience will tell you the same.[/QUOTE]
Guess what.
My first gun was my AK47.
I didn't make a mistake.
Because now I own about 6 guns. I have shot a ton of Military Machine guns and sniper rifles since I live in the US In Virginia, which is pretty much where the biggest gun shows in the United States are located.
You can shoot a fucking .22LR with your dick. Discussion over. Its pretty much a BB gun.
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19800553]Guess what.
My first gun was my AK47.
I didn't make a mistake.
Because now I own about 6 guns. I have shot a ton of Military Machine guns and sniper rifles since I live in the US In Virginia, which is pretty much where the biggest gun shows in the United States are located.
You can shoot a fucking .22LR with your dick. Discussion over. Its pretty much a BB gun.[/QUOTE]
7.62x39 isn't the same as 7.62x54R, .30-06 or 8mm, they're entirely different beasts and the recoil on an AK is not the same as that of a Springfield or similar bolt action rifle. .22 may have been the equivalent of a BB gun 30 years ago, but not anymore, don't fuck around with it.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan;19768102]a 60 round magazine would just be comical (unless it is a drum, if there are even any mini-14 drum mags)[/QUOTE]
Yeah, they sell C-Mags for the Mini 14.
Jeeze, 22lr is a BB-gun if you look at the recoil... hell my BB guns have a lot more recoil due to the spring than my 22. Otherwise it's a quite potent round that is accurate and even deadly at right (and most often in wrong) hands.
Then again if shooting is rapidly firing something with a lot of recoil and not trying to be accurate to you, AK is probably the best gun since the recoil doesn't make you cry and you got 30 rounds to rapidly spray. Almost all competitions that are about accuracy on short-med range are shot with a .22, so it's good to start with a gun like that to learn to shoot accurately. And it's also very economical.
Mikhail you sound like you are compensating for something when nothing under an AK is good enough apparently.
My first gun was a Beretta Bobcat in .22LR. Not the best to start out on, IMO.
can someone explain the concept of caliber to me?
How is it measured, what does it mean?
The term most often appears with respect to firearms, as a measure of the inside diameter of the barrel in inches (or hundredths of an inch) or in millimetres.
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19800553]
You can shoot a fucking .22LR with your dick.[/QUOTE]
:byodood:
I don't want to try
[QUOTE=evilking1;19801152]Jeeze, 22lr is a BB-gun if you look at the recoil... hell my BB guns have a lot more recoil due to the spring than my 22. Otherwise it's a quite potent round that is accurate and even deadly at right (and most often in wrong) hands.
Then again if shooting is rapidly firing something with a lot of recoil and not trying to be accurate to you, AK is probably the best gun since the recoil doesn't make you cry and you got 30 rounds to rapidly spray. Almost all competitions that are about accuracy on short-med range are shot with a .22, so it's good to start with a gun like that to learn to shoot accurately. And it's also very economical.
Mikhail you sound like you are compensating for something when nothing under an AK is good enough apparently.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying its bad.
I am saying that everyone here who is saying 'ZOMG IF U GO SHOOT AN AK47 AS UR FIRST GUN UR DEAD MEAT' knows nothing about rifles. Its retarded. [b]Your first gun can be anything.[/b]
9mm > 7.62x39mm in my own opinion. 7.62x54 rimmed is too uncommon and much larger than the AK47 round. Its a good round but its gonna cost you quite a bit.
7.62x39mm is not cheap. 19 USD for a box of 25 Wolf Hollow points is [i]terrible[/i]
9mm is probably the best thing on the market and most enjoyable. I LOVE shooting my Glock 19 Compact because it has a 16 round magazine (33 round extended magazine) and little to no recoil. BUT IT IS DEAD FUCKING ACCURATE. 9mm also cost 12 USD for a box of 25 which is extremely cheap.
I am trying to get to the point. Shooting a .22LR isn't even worth it even if the ammo is cheap. Using the fact the ammo is cheap you can get something like a BB Gun instead.
For the note, I am pretty much saying 'Why waste your money on a .22LR rifle in which probably cost you around 200-300 USD if you want a decent one? When you could just buy an AK47 for 400-600 USD, an SKS for 180-300 USD, a Glock 19 for 525 USD, an AR-10/15 for 650-1000 US. A Mosin Nagant 91/30 for 1-200 USD.'
Its retarded to buy something that will do little to no damage for self defense, and make you look like a retard when you are out at the range shooting it. Especially when it cost the same as something better.
[QUOTE=evilking1;19802037]The term most often appears with respect to firearms, as a measure of the inside diameter of the barrel in inches (or hundredths of an inch) or in millimetres.[/QUOTE]
I prefer to think with percentage, so a .50 cal is 50% of an inch, but remember that . infront of the number. Otherwise a .308 would be six times larger than a .50 cal.
1 Inch is by the way 2,54 cm. So a .50 is 1,27 cm thick.
[QUOTE=evilking1;19802037]The term most often appears with respect to firearms, as a measure of the inside diameter of the barrel in inches (or hundredths of an inch) or in millimetres.[/QUOTE]
So then naturally the diameter of the round matches the diameter of the barrel?
[QUOTE=aidan_dammit;19802402]So then naturally the diameter of the round matches the diameter of the barrel?[/QUOTE]
So yeah always. Guns work that way. There might be some very slight variations though, at least I've seen one .22lr ammo being offered in a slightly thicker variation for improved accuracy.
-snip,Igotninja'dBAD.-
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]
Its retarded to buy something that will do little to no damage for self defense, and make you look like a retard when you are out at the range shooting it. Especially when it cost the same as something better.[/QUOTE]
I lol'd. There is a difference between being able to shoot and [B]knowing[/B] how to shoot. Any retard can go hot a mag downrange at 20 meters.
Fact remains that for teaching principles of marksmanship and building experience, .22LR remains the perfect cartridge for such a job.
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]7.62x54 rimmed is too uncommon[/QUOTE]
lol
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]I am trying to get to the point. Shooting a .22LR isn't even worth it even if the ammo is cheap. Using the fact the ammo is cheap you can get something like a BB Gun instead.[/QUOTE]
lol
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]Its retarded to buy something that will do little to no damage for self defense, and make you look like a retard when you are out at the range shooting it.[/QUOTE]
lol
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]I'm not saying its bad.
I am saying that everyone here who is saying 'ZOMG IF U GO SHOOT AN AK47 AS UR FIRST GUN UR DEAD MEAT' knows nothing about rifles. Its retarded. [B]Your first gun can be anything.[/B]
9mm > 7.62x39mm in my own opinion. 7.62x54 rimmed is too uncommon and much larger than the AK47 round. Its a good round but its gonna cost you quite a bit.
7.62x39mm is not cheap. 19 USD for a box of 25 Wolf Hollow points is [I]terrible[/I]
9mm is probably the best thing on the market and most enjoyable. I LOVE shooting my Glock 19 Compact because it has a 16 round magazine (33 round extended magazine) and little to no recoil. BUT IT IS DEAD FUCKING ACCURATE. 9mm also cost 12 USD for a box of 25 which is extremely cheap.
I am trying to get to the point. Shooting a .22LR isn't even worth it even if the ammo is cheap. Using the fact the ammo is cheap you can get something like a BB Gun instead.
For the note, I am pretty much saying 'Why waste your money on a .22LR rifle in which probably cost you around 200-300 USD if you want a decent one? When you could just buy an AK47 for 400-600 USD, an SKS for 180-300 USD, a Glock 19 for 525 USD, an AR-10/15 for 650-1000 US. A Mosin Nagant 91/30 for 1-200 USD.'
Its retarded to buy something that will do little to no damage for self defense, and make you look like a retard when you are out at the range shooting it. Especially when it cost the same as something better.[/QUOTE]
Yes it CAN be anything but a .22 is still a good place to start.
I'm not saying you have to start with a .22, it's just common practice and widely recommended. Every time I talk to a rangemaster, a gun dealer, an instructor they typically tell new shooters to do the same.
So it isn't 100% essential. But that many people who know a lot more about firearm training than you or I do can't be wrong. Also, what planet do you live on where 7.62x39mm and 7.62x54mmR cost a lot? They both run less than 25-50 cents a shot. You can buy the stuff in bulk online and it will cost even less. But it doesn't change the fact that the ONLY way to learn good marksmanship is to put thousands of rounds down range and the cheapest way to do that is a .22 rife.
Your video of you dumping your AK's magazine without hitting anything doesn't win your argument any points either. Granted, I don't know if you do take accurate, deliberate, slow shots. You very well might.
As for a .22 for self defense. It can do in a pinch but that's not what it's meant for. You buy it specifically to get the basics down and that costs 20$ for 500 rounds. That and a .22 is excellent for dealing with varmint infestations. You don't need to waste 50 cent centerfire rounds to deal with squirrel problems.
And nobody is going to laugh at you if you show up to a range with a .22 rifle. That's simply preposterous.
[QUOTE=aidan_dammit;19802402]So then naturally the diameter of the round matches the diameter of the barrel?[/QUOTE]
Correct. Variations such as the difference between .308 and .311 barrel diameters can make a difference. If you load a .311 bullet on a .308 casing and fire it out of a .308 barrel you can damage the rifling. That's 3 thousanths of an inch off and you're reaping havoc on your gun.
As for the metric measurements it's basically the same thing.
Only in millimiters.
For instance 9x19mm means a bullet that's 9mm in diameter and the whole thing is 19mm long. 9x21mm means the same diameter with a longer casing. Sometimes there are additions to the name to further designate it (applies both for imperial and metric measurements) such as 9mm Largo, .30 Carbine (AKA 7.62x33mm, not to be confused with 7.62x39mm which is the AK bullet), .38 Special, etc.
9x19mm has also been called 9mm PARA/Parabellum (after a latin phrase) and 9x19mm NATO (since it is the standard NATO handgun round). 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm also have NATO tacked on the ends of their names for the same reason.
If a metric caliber ends with R that means the cartridge is rimmed. It has a big, fat rim around the base. Often the case with older calibers. For example 7.62x54mmR is the Mosin Nagant bullet and has serves today as the communist bloc equivalent of the non-rimmed 7.62x51mm NATO.
As I mentioned earlier, calibers can go by multiple names. Sometimes this happens when you note the difference between a metric and imperial designation. For instance 7.62x51mm NATO is .308 Winchester and 5.56x45mm NATO is .223 Remington. They go by different names, but are completely interchangeable.
Now it gets weirder.
There are also calibers from the days of black powder such as .45-70 which is this massive honking straight-necked bullet. The .45 refers to the bullet diameter and the 70 refers to how many grains of black powder were inside the casing. Newer designations such as .30-30 and .30-40 Krag use this old terminology but they always contained the more powerful smokeless powder so that can get confusing.
Then we have 30.06 which is what Americans fired out of their machine guns and battle rifles in WW1 and WW2. That designation means .30 caliber, developed in 1906. IT has also been called 7.62x63mm (If I'm not mistaken). It's the only caliber I know of that uses this type of designation.
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]9mm also cost 12 USD for a box of 25 which is extremely cheap.[/QUOTE]
I don't know where you're buying from, but that is way too much $ for target 9mm ammo.
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]I'm not saying its bad.
I am saying that everyone here who is saying 'ZOMG IF U GO SHOOT AN AK47 AS UR FIRST GUN UR DEAD MEAT' knows nothing about rifles. Its retarded. [b]Your first gun can be anything.[/b]
9mm > 7.62x39mm in my own opinion. 7.62x54 rimmed is too uncommon and much larger than the AK47 round. Its a good round but its gonna cost you quite a bit.
7.62x39mm is not cheap. 19 USD for a box of 25 Wolf Hollow points is [i]terrible[/i]
9mm is probably the best thing on the market and most enjoyable. I LOVE shooting my Glock 19 Compact because it has a 16 round magazine (33 round extended magazine) and little to no recoil. BUT IT IS DEAD FUCKING ACCURATE. 9mm also cost 12 USD for a box of 25 which is extremely cheap.
I am trying to get to the point. Shooting a .22LR isn't even worth it even if the ammo is cheap. Using the fact the ammo is cheap you can get something like a BB Gun instead.
For the note, I am pretty much saying 'Why waste your money on a .22LR rifle in which probably cost you around 200-300 USD if you want a decent one? When you could just buy an AK47 for 400-600 USD, an SKS for 180-300 USD, a Glock 19 for 525 USD, an AR-10/15 for 650-1000 US. A Mosin Nagant 91/30 for 1-200 USD.'
Its retarded to buy something that will do little to no damage for self defense, and make you look like a retard when you are out at the range shooting it. Especially when it cost the same as something better.[/QUOTE]
get out
[QUOTE=Bean-O;19803478]
As I mentioned earlier, calibers can go by multiple names. Sometimes this happens when you note the difference between a metric and imperial designation. For instance 7.62x51mm NATO is .308 Winchester and 5.56x45mm NATO is .223 Remington. They go by different names, but are completely interchangeable.
[/QUOTE]
Interchangeable but you have to know the loading to make sure you don't put a high pressured round into a receiver that can't handle it.
Like a particularly hot military 5.56 into a civilian ar-15, but most of the time they are built to handle both well enough.
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19804496]Interchangeable but you have to know the loading to make sure you don't put a high pressured round into a receiver that can't handle it.
Like a particularly hot military 5.56 into a civilian ar-15, but most of the time they are built to handle both well enough.[/QUOTE]
This is true, and I have heard there are very very minute dimensional differences between .223 and 5.56. Don't know how it effects performance, if you're trying to get bleeding-edge accuracy/muzzle velocity out of a bench rifle or something.
it goes without saying that they're interchangeable and it only matters if you're doing some serious competition shooting of the range/accuracy variety
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19804496]Interchangeable but you have to know the loading to make sure you don't put a high pressured round into a receiver that can't handle it.
Like a particularly hot military 5.56 into a civilian ar-15, but most of the time they are built to handle both well enough.[/QUOTE]
Most AR-15s are built to military specs, so it wouldn't make much of a difference, but I wouldn't advise shooting military 5.56 out of a Mini 14 or something.
[QUOTE=mugofdoom;19806654]Most AR-15s are built to military specs, so it wouldn't make much of a difference, but I wouldn't advise shooting military 5.56 out of a Mini 14 or something.[/QUOTE]
The manual specifies that it can shoot both just fine.
[QUOTE=Bean-O;19807935]The manual specifies that it can shoot both just fine.[/QUOTE]
Really? Thought it was only .223.
[QUOTE=Mikhail;19802344]I'm not saying its bad.
I am saying that everyone here who is saying 'ZOMG IF U GO SHOOT AN AK47 AS UR FIRST GUN UR DEAD MEAT' knows nothing about rifles. Its retarded. [B]Your first gun can be anything.[/B]
9mm > 7.62x39mm in my own opinion. 7.62x54 rimmed is too uncommon and much larger than the AK47 round. Its a good round but its gonna cost you quite a bit.
7.62x39mm is not cheap. 19 USD for a box of 25 Wolf Hollow points is [I]terrible[/I]
9mm is probably the best thing on the market and most enjoyable. I LOVE shooting my Glock 19 Compact because it has a 16 round magazine (33 round extended magazine) and little to no recoil. BUT IT IS DEAD FUCKING ACCURATE. 9mm also cost 12 USD for a box of 25 which is extremely cheap.
I am trying to get to the point. Shooting a .22LR isn't even worth it even if the ammo is cheap. Using the fact the ammo is cheap you can get something like a BB Gun instead.
For the note, I am pretty much saying 'Why waste your money on a .22LR rifle in which probably cost you around 200-300 USD if you want a decent one? When you could just buy an AK47 for 400-600 USD, an SKS for 180-300 USD, a Glock 19 for 525 USD, an AR-10/15 for 650-1000 US. A Mosin Nagant 91/30 for 1-200 USD.'
Its retarded to buy something that will do little to no damage for self defense, and make you look like a retard when you are out at the range shooting it. Especially when it cost the same as something better.[/QUOTE]
Comparing a rifle round to a pistol round is like comparing apples to oranges.
Also, .22 rifles are fantastic for their price.
[QUOTE=mugofdoom;19808428]Really? Thought it was only .223.[/QUOTE]
Page 11.
[url]http://www.scribd.com/doc/8386851/Ruger-Mini14-Rifle-Instruction-Manual[/url]
It specifically states that a Mini 14 can fire both .223 Remington and military 5.56 rounds.
[QUOTE=Bean-O;19816935]Page 11.
[URL]http://www.scribd.com/doc/8386851/Ruger-Mini14-Rifle-Instruction-Manual[/URL]
It specifically states that a Mini 14 can fire both .223 Remington and military 5.56 rounds.[/QUOTE]
Yea we have stripper clips of military 5.56 rounds for the magazine.
Just for a clarifcation.
When they say that marksman aim for the center of mass, they mean the center mass of the torso, not the center of mass of the whole body right? Some people have told me the center of mass of a human is right below the belly button, yet I've always thought that marksman aim for the solar plexus.
[QUOTE=Oecleus;19823181]Just for a clarifcation.
When they say that marksman aim for the center of mass, they mean the center mass of the torso, not the center of mass of the whole body right? Some people have told me the center of mass of a human is right below the belly button, yet I've always thought that marksman aim for the solar plexus.[/QUOTE]
Aim for the high torso. The heart, lungs, aorta, etc. are all there.
[img]http://home.off-road.com/~mithrandir/high-torso.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=JDK721;19823243]Aim for the high torso. The heart, lungs, aorta, etc. are all there.
[img]http://home.off-road.com/~mithrandir/high-torso.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Yea. I kinda figured that, I was wondering if it's the center of mass of the whole body or the torso or what.
[QUOTE=aidan_dammit;19801988]can someone explain the concept of caliber to me?
How is it measured, what does it mean?[/QUOTE]
Well first off America uses inches to measure their calibers while Europe uses the scientific metric system.
Okay so the caliber measured by the length of the bullet and diameter of the base.
For example, a 9mm Parabellum bullet would be written as 9x19. 9 meaning the diameter base, and the 19 meaning the length of the bullet.
Added to OP by the way.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
