Greetings,

Wanted to get some input/discussion on what the group thought
constituted what I'm calling the "2nd-tier" of transferrable full-auto
guns.  Mainly talking about somewhat 'available' guns, not the ultra-rare items
that have < 10 in the registry.

To start off, most people would place the following in the
"top tier" (most desirable) of transferrable full autos (no specific
order)--

After the above, there seems to be a class of weapons that just aren't as
popular, for whatever reason.  Some that I think meet this qualification would
include these--

I'm sure there are others-- any suggestions on this list?

(*I realize that I don't have any belt-feds included, but this is a bit of a different
niche, depending upon what one is looking for.)

Just out of curiosity whats the point of dividing them into tiers? Not like you get a special ribbon for owning a special grade of MG.

With that being said if i was told to divide transferable MGs into Teirs I would do it by price as this takes into account the economics of supply and demand. The more reliable, modern or historic value a firearm has the more demand there will be for it and well supply is pretty self explanatory.

$5-10k - Entry Tier - Mac, Sten, Sterling, AC556, FN FNC. Most are reliable and fun to shoot but usually just considered a range toy. If this is your only MG its probably because youre on a tight budget and want to own a MG just because its fun! Honestly most people could sell a could rifles and accessories and be able to afford one of these if they really wanted too. Its not uncommon to be at a range with someone doing mag dumps with a Mac.

$10-30k - Mid Tier - M16, HK, Uzi, AK, Thompson, M1919. Far more desirable, modern and more versatile making them worth more. These are the guns almost all shooters would love to own but are just out of the price range of the avg shooter. I occasionally see people shooting these at a range but typically they are being rented from the range.

$30k+ - High Tier - M60, M249, M2 BMG, MG42. Almost all are belt fed firearms that are very rare, expensive to shoot/maintain and only serious collectors dabble with this level of firearms. People that own these usually have a pretty large collection. Most are worth more than the yearly salary of the avg working American and their only chance to shoot one will be to rent one at a range. Ive actually never seen someone shoot a belt fed at a range, got to go to MG shoots like Knob Creek if you want to see one in action i guess. Even the semi-auto new production versions of these rifles can sell for $5-10k+

LoL... no, not looking for any sort of ribbon or attention.  Just trying to better organize
my thinking around what's available/recommended/popular in the different price categories.

So, looks like you nailed it with your reply... just the sort of information I was looking
for.

In the end, I agree with where you put the AK; it did cross my mind when I was making
my original post but I couldn't decide on where it should fall; AK prices are well into
mid-range (generally), but most people don't seem nearly as interested in the AK as,
say, they are in the M16's or HK's of the world.  A tad puzzling, considering that AK's
are generally pretty reliable and somewhat cheaper to feed (7.62 x 39), as well.

And, you're probably correct about the "high" tier... even those who can afford the
"up front" cost may have limited resources to "run" them. (vs., say, dumping 9 mm through
a MAC).

just my $0.02

Why worry about getting what is "popular"? Get what you can afford, and what works for you.

I like shooting subgun competitions, and I bought my guns with this in mind. While a belted might be interesting, for example, but I wouldn't be able to use it for much except an expensive way to hammer dirt clods into dust.

The AK tends to be more of a collectors item like the Thompson.  But like the Thompson, it is a "one trick pony".  Run a few mags, then let it sit.  Every other of the other "Top Tier" choices the part that is the "machinegun" can have an "upper" or other fresh host can be shot.  I feel it is the versatility of the platforms that has made these platforms so valuable.  I think the MAC family of RR will climb once the platform is further developed.  The Lage products has certainly raised the values of the MAC family of RR.  I think the S.A.B.R.E. was not a very thorough design.  But the concept certainly can be developed.  Buy what you want.  YMMV.

Scott

Parts availability. Many guns have near zero availability of parts, putting them at risk of being expensive paperweights, or great cost for the owner to one-off a part.

This right here.  

With 1 M16, you can have many many machine guns (standard .223/5.56, whatever-the-latest-.223-killer-fad-is, belt feeds, SMG (22lr, 9mm, etc), PDW (5.7).  All in a fully customizable system we are familiar with .
M16s are very expensive, especially considering how MANY of them there are on the registry versus just about everything else not a MAC or an Uzi.


While you are at it, add the Reising M50 to the list

It's my understanding that one reason that there were relatively few AK47 semi's converted to FA was the general low availablility of 7.62 x 39 ammo in the pre-May '86 timeframe.  A number of the conversions were simultaneously converted to shoot 5.56 x 45 as that was much more common in the U.S., and that drove up the cost of the conversion.  And quite a few of those have been converted back to 7.62 x 39.

The AK has grown in popularity in the last decade since the start of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was often used by special force and civilian contractors to blend into the native population. And as usually civilians love to copy what the military does. It's amazing how's within a few years people opinion of the AK went from it being a piece of Cold War era junk to the latest and greatest rifle.

Wih that being said this is part of the reason why there at so few AKs. Back in 1986 and before the AK was considered junk and was also with th Cold War in full force it was considered to weapon of the enemy.

I'm glad at least some people liked the AK platform pre 86' or I wouldn't have my little monster.....

Thanks for all the great discussion thus far.



I think Renegade's f/u nicely sums up another aspect that I'm trying to just flesh out better with
this thread.  Even something as mundane as magazines can be a trick to find (e.g., until recently, the MACs; or,
try to find aftermarket mags for an MP-40).  On the other hand, for some platforms, the country is essentially
flooded with readily available, economical mags (AR, AK, Uzi).

A great point, and one that I'm old enough that I should remember.  In the 80's (especially pre-'86),
you weren't going to find 7.62x39mm in-stock at just any old hardware store.  And recall, no
mail order (and of course, no internet) sale of ammo to non-FFL's in that era... so you were kind of
stuck with whatever you could find on-hand locally.

I think another thing that makes an AK slightly less desirable as a "shooter" is that although reliable, it's
not as easy to maintain as some other platforms.  E.g., you could shoot a barrel out of an AR or an UZI
and just replace it at home; but, doing this for an AK would be a bit more complicated endeavor.

Yep!  This is a big pain for transferables.  I love mine, but I always can't shoot them as much as I can my AR, M16, Uzi, or other guns, because changing to barrel needs to be done by an expert on such an expensive gun so the rivets and such look right.  Sucks, but still worth it IMO.