User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:57:20 AM EDT
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:58:05 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't care for the gen 3 flocks. The finger groves are horrible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 2:04:51 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Running forward Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What exactly were they expecting to happen between 400m and 0m where the bayonet came into play? Running forward Yup, bayonet charge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 2:07:46 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Mannlicher rifle loading clips That's actually a decent system for a bolt action rifle if you load them with stripper clips. I shoot my Carcano M91 carbine and it's great. Just throw in a charger and when it loads the last round it just falls out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 2:27:42 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not just a non solution to a non problem, but a solution that makes a potential problem worse. Exactly right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 2:33:56 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I actually love that little loop on the bottom. Insert magazine, chamber round, eject magazine, use your spare round from the bottom of the mag to top off. --> 8+1. I'd love a pistol magazine pouch that featured a similar option; hold 2x magazines + 2x spare rounds for topping up the magazine. Thing about that is, you don't insert the mag then chamber a round. You insert the fully loaded mag, hit the barrel release, take the round from the loop and chamber it, then close the barrel. Done, fully loaded. It's actually really well thought out. Beretta made pistols like that too: tip up barrel, no extractor. They might still make them. If not, they haven't been gone for long. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 2:38:57 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I mean, all countries went in to WWI with fairly comparable rifles. People still hadn't figured out how best to take advantage of smokeless powder and thought that pushing for the most range possible was the way to go. I will humbly nominate the M16 forward assist. A non-solution to a non-problem that was devised by people who only knew (and only cared for) the mighty M1. Or, alternatively, Glock style trigger safeties  Another good nominee is the M1's safety being inside the trigger guard. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm talking about pathetically bad design aspects. For example, Germany went to WW1 with a rifle with a minimum elevation setting of 400 meters. I mean, all countries went in to WWI with fairly comparable rifles. People still hadn't figured out how best to take advantage of smokeless powder and thought that pushing for the most range possible was the way to go. I will humbly nominate the M16 forward assist. A non-solution to a non-problem that was devised by people who only knew (and only cared for) the mighty M1. Or, alternatively, Glock style trigger safeties Another good nominee is the M1's safety being inside the trigger guard. Also, most countries who did a 300 yard - 400 meter starting point for there sights arrived at that decision because at all ranged below that the shot was still in the 'kill zone'. Sights very low to the bore axis help extend the range that this can be done. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:08:06 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thing about that is, you don't insert the mag then chamber a round. You insert the fully loaded mag, hit the barrel release, take the round from the loop and chamber it, then close the barrel. Done, fully loaded. It's actually really well thought out. Beretta made pistols like that too: tip up barrel, no extractor. They might still make them. If not, they haven't been gone for long. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I actually love that little loop on the bottom. Insert magazine, chamber round, eject magazine, use your spare round from the bottom of the mag to top off. --> 8+1. I'd love a pistol magazine pouch that featured a similar option; hold 2x magazines + 2x spare rounds for topping up the magazine. Thing about that is, you don't insert the mag then chamber a round. You insert the fully loaded mag, hit the barrel release, take the round from the loop and chamber it, then close the barrel. Done, fully loaded. It's actually really well thought out. Beretta made pistols like that too: tip up barrel, no extractor. They might still make them. If not, they haven't been gone for long. Thats awesome. We need to bring back the +1 ammo loop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:11:44 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didn't they have like 75 or 100 years after the first 1911 to figure that out? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: All the companies making double-stack 1911-style pistols would disagree. You mean - didn't they wait for the patents to expire? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:13:17 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I had to google Grip Zone to see what it was. What was the actual explanation? Was it just shitty marketing ascetics?? I want to believe that it was just a note on the drawings about wanting they area to be texturized and some over literal mold designer went ahead and put the text on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:22:18 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: WE found out in the Boer War (the 2nd of them) that standing in rows, or even standing in the open, was not going to be a winning strategy in modern warfare SMLE min. sight setting was what again? The SMLE that didn't exist when the 98 was issued? Do tell - what was the minimum sight setting on the British issue rifle in 1898? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:24:28 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 400m is crazy because, how does one fully zero at 400m with irons? Fire 5 rounds, walk out 400m, walk back, adjust sights, fire again? And then doing this with thousands of infantrymen. Not to mention of course the effect of accuracy at that range. Not sure about the rifle in question, but the WW2 SMLE 4.5moa was considered standard for accuracy, and 2.5moa rifles were for Snipers/DMR's. So at 400m, even perfect shooting would be producing 10-18" groups for zeroing...not factoring in sighting and shooters errors. You shoot at 100yds or 25yds for a POI that's a certain number of inches above POA. This is detailed in the documentation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:25:34 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll take "attempt to make a windowed magazine before the invention of strong clear plastic" for $200. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Chauchat open magazine. Nothing better than a pound of mud in your mag and action. https://collections.royalarmouries.org/media/emumedia/0/876/large_DI_2014_2893.jpg I'll take "attempt to make a windowed magazine before the invention of strong clear plastic" for $200. Yep, loader has to be able to clearly see how many rounds remaining. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:29:25 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know the whole story, but the 98 Mauser started out with sights that started at 200. When they switched to the Spitzer bullet the minimum setting became 400. I think it was a bit lazy of them not to do more to correct the sights. The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 11:34:17 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The SMLE that didn't exist when the 98 was issued? Do tell - what was the minimum sight setting on the British issue rifle in 1898? Exactly the same as the SMLE - 200yds.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 11:56:10 AM EDT
[#16]
I'll stand up in defense of the AR/M-16 forward assist.
It's a very specific circumstance, but if you want to quietly charge the rifle, and you ride the charging handle forward, you'll often need to push the forward assist to get the bolt fully closed and the round into battery. Should you already be locked and loaded when the enemy isn't nearby? Sure, but I can see it happening. And letting the charging handle/bolt fly forward full-force does not seem like a good idea while you're hiding in ambush position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 12:51:53 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll stand up in defense of the AR/M-16 forward assist. It's a very specific circumstance, but if you want to quietly charge the rifle, and you ride the charging handle forward, you'll often need to push the forward assist to get the bolt fully closed and the round into battery. Should you already be locked and loaded when the enemy isn't nearby? Sure, but I can see it happening. And letting the charging handle/bolt fly forward full-force does not seem like a good idea while you're hiding in ambush position. I'd rather have a fixed, right-side, reciprocating charging handle, effectively like the M14. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:05:39 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd rather have a fixed, right-side, reciprocating charging handle, effectively like the M14. Gross. That's moving in the wrong direction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:18:44 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Forward assist Honestly, between extremely hot dry and dusty environments and user error, every serious war rifle should have a forward assist, even if it’s rarely used. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:21:48 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My favorite gun retardation is HK retardation. First, they design a folding G36 stock that completely blocks the ejection port, giving no fucks. Then, they make one with a hole through it to allow ejection, but only at the extended positions... and build a mechanism into the stock to prevent it from folding except at the extended positions...because a folding stock needs to be complicated. It's adjustable, but not enough, and has an adjustable cheek piece with too few positions. The ejection port blocking 'Lithuanian contract style' stock (airsoft version): https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/6794/Inkedg36_folding_cock_blocker_LI_jpg-1788178.JPG New and improved, nerfs itself so it won't fold in the two shortest positions (also airsoft version, but real one looks the same) ...and you can tell this one is airsoft, because the real one will not let you fold it in that position (you can see the stock blocking the ejection port). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/6794/g36_idz_stock_folded_LI_jpg-1788181.JPG Also, this one made me laugh. On the A3 collapsing stocks for the MP5, there is a little spring loaded button that makes the stock go 'boop' and pop open about a 1/4 inch when you press the stock release button. Why this is needed, I'm not sure...but when they upgraded to the longer French contract type stock, the extended the 'boop' button to make it work with the longer stock. That's all that does... make the stock 'boop' out 1/4 inch when the stock release button is pushed. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/6794/mp5a3_stock_arrow_jpg-1788166.JPG ..all it does... is make the stock 'boop'. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/6794/mp5f_stock_LI_jpg-1788168.JPG There is other stuff too, like when they put protective ears on a sight, then make the sight aperture taller than the protective ears. Or, put a storage compartment in the grip that is so secretive and hidden, most people don't know it's there, or how to open it, and you need a tool to do it. Then there is that sling.... The "boop" is so that if for whatever reason you can't pull the stock back in the same fluid motion as releasing it with the lever, it won't just lock itself again when you let go of the lever. You can "boop" it and then extend it in two distinct actions, or if doing it in one motion, provides an assist in making sure you smoothly clear the latch. It makes one-handed extension much easier and smoother. Which is why I don't like the multi-position stocks, because they defeat this. Basically HAVE to extend those two-handed if you want to go to full. I rather like the 3 point sling concept. The problem with it is originals are hard to get, and reproductions are not necessarily correct with the mounting clips. Same for the clip points on the weapons with clones. Tolerances are apparently quite small for enabling the sling to clip easily, but at the same time not fall off during normal use. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:22:52 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Gross. That's moving in the wrong direction. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'd rather have a fixed, right-side, reciprocating charging handle, effectively like the M14. Gross. That's moving in the wrong direction. I've put probably 14,000 rounds thru M1As in various competitions and events, if you're holding the rifle by the stock in the left hand and using the right hand to remove/replace mags then a fixed, right-side, reciprocating charging handle is pretty damn awesome. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:28:53 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: if you're holding the rifle by the stock in the left hand and using the right hand to remove/replace mags then a fixed, right-side, reciprocating charging handle is pretty damn awesome. Well, that's a pretty big and derpy "if"... unless you're left handed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:33:23 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll stand up in defense of the AR/M-16 forward assist. It's a very specific circumstance, but if you want to quietly charge the rifle, and you ride the charging handle forward, you'll often need to push the forward assist to get the bolt fully closed and the round into battery. Should you already be locked and loaded when the enemy isn't nearby? Sure, but I can see it happening. And letting the charging handle/bolt fly forward full-force does not seem like a good idea while you're hiding in ambush position. I don't get the hatred for it, either. It adds a negligible amount of weight to the rifle, and it's a useful tool in the toolbox. If you don't like it, don't use it, maybe? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 1:43:18 PM EDT
[#24]
Gripzone is stupid but it doesn't affect the performance of the gun one way or another.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:33:04 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: First thing I thought was GRIPZONE. It's just inexplicably bad. Someone explain it to me. You can't. My apologies for the ignorance: What is Grip zone? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:35:09 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My apologies for the ignorance: What is Grip zone? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: First thing I thought was GRIPZONE. It's just inexplicably bad. Someone explain it to me. You can't. My apologies for the ignorance: What is Grip zone? Springfield Armory molded those words into the grip of a new pistol they released a few years ago. Some people think it's a big deal. It really isn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:41:07 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't know the whole story, but the 98 Mauser started out with sights that started at 200. When they switched to the Spitzer bullet the minimum setting became 400. I think it was a bit lazy of them not to do more to correct the sights. The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. In in terms of non-wierd sights from that era, Norwegian Krag sights went down to 100m. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2021 4:57:06 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Springfield Armory molded those words into the grip of a new pistol they released a few years ago. Some people think it's a big deal. It really isn't. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: First thing I thought was GRIPZONE. It's just inexplicably bad. Someone explain it to me. You can't. My apologies for the ignorance: What is Grip zone? Springfield Armory molded those words into the grip of a new pistol they released a few years ago. Some people think it's a big deal. It really isn't. Ok, thanks! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 12:56:47 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rommel actually bitches about the 400yd sight setting/Lange sight in his book about WW1. As I recall he was in Belgium in early WW1 when things were still mobile, and it was a pain for shooting the guy across the street in town. In in terms of non-wierd sights from that era, Norwegian Krag sights went down to 100m. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 2:46:24 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Honestly, between extremely hot dry and dusty environments and user error, every serious war rifle should have a forward assist, even if it's rarely used. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 2:56:43 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. It is funny that the ordnance department could have this perception while also having a massive pigsticker to go with the rifle. Our soldiers will always route the enemy forces from hundreds of meters away! But in case that doesn't work, they can also stab them. There is no in-between. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 2:59:41 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FPNI, but also "pull trigger to release slide". Unless I'm sending a bullet dowrange or practicing same, I should not be pulling a trigger. I don't get this one. I dry fire and believe that everyone could benefit from dry firing. The same checks and rechecks should be done for cleaning the gun anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 8:26:22 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is funny that the ordnance department could have this perception while also having a massive pigsticker to go with the rifle. Our soldiers will always route the enemy forces from hundreds of meters away! But in case that doesn't work, they can also stab them. There is no in-between. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. It is funny that the ordnance department could have this perception while also having a massive pigsticker to go with the rifle. Our soldiers will always route the enemy forces from hundreds of meters away! But in case that doesn't work, they can also stab them. There is no in-between. The answer is a lot more nuanced than you seem to think, when smokeless powder was first introduced, everyone still stuck with full length infantry rifles, and typically had bayonets of reasonable length. It wouldn't be till the universal short rifle concept came around that you see the monster short swords come into popularity. Why? Cavalry. Until WW1 brought modern artillery and MG's to the fight, cavalry was still a major factor. Not only are guys on horses fast, having a short gun and short knife is less appealing than a short gun with a long knife. Today we look at sights that bottom out at 200 yards and scoff, but it's not going to make a difference. The Germans were an exception, but history is littered with terrible German small arms decisions |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 10:01:47 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryThe turn of the 20th century saw some pretty funky stuff in self-loading development, largely because of patent issues. Someone (JMB, I think) actually had patent protection on the protruding bolt handle. So you saw a lot of interesting concepts for charging. Like the aforementioned shotgun, and the Winchester 1907's underbarrel charging plunger. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 10:08:51 AM EDT
[#35]
I don't have firsthand experience but plenty of guys I've talked to stationed in Alaska and a few Canadians have said that the forward assist is absolutely needed in extreme cold winter conditions.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 10:16:11 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The answer is a lot more nuanced than you seem to think, when smokeless powder was first introduced, everyone still stuck with full length infantry rifles, and typically had bayonets of reasonable length. It wouldn't be till the universal short rifle concept came around that you see the monster short swords come into popularity. Why? Cavalry. Until WW1 brought modern artillery and MG's to the fight, cavalry was still a major factor. Not only are guys on horses fast, having a short gun and short knife is less appealing than a short gun with a long knife. Today we look at sights that bottom out at 200 yards and scoff, but it's not going to make a difference. The Germans were an exception, but history is littered with terrible German small arms decisions Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. It is funny that the ordnance department could have this perception while also having a massive pigsticker to go with the rifle. Our soldiers will always route the enemy forces from hundreds of meters away! But in case that doesn't work, they can also stab them. There is no in-between. The answer is a lot more nuanced than you seem to think, when smokeless powder was first introduced, everyone still stuck with full length infantry rifles, and typically had bayonets of reasonable length. It wouldn't be till the universal short rifle concept came around that you see the monster short swords come into popularity. Why? Cavalry. Until WW1 brought modern artillery and MG's to the fight, cavalry was still a major factor. Not only are guys on horses fast, having a short gun and short knife is less appealing than a short gun with a long knife. Today we look at sights that bottom out at 200 yards and scoff, but it's not going to make a difference. The Germans were an exception, but history is littered with terrible German small arms decisions  I personally find it hilarious that they bought some Mausers, played with them, decided to smash some Krag features on to them, and then got sued by Mauser. If we hadn't gotten involved in WW1, we'd have paid patent royalties to Mauser until the patents expired. This is extra funny in threads here about people "ripping off" firearms patents. I got nearly cruxified for suggesting magpul's main patent is pretty weak, and depends on the exact shape of the "fake bullet" on the follower. Meanwhile, U.S. Ordinance straight up ripped off Mauser and got bent over in court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 10:41:22 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Some idiot decided to put the Loaded Chamber Indicator directly in line with the front sight...and yes it partially obscures the front sight. https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-kp97pt369w/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/2263/5232/SVimg-KP38233-LCI__85271.1515511824.jpg?c=2 The best chamber indicator I have seen is the one Ruger put on the LCP. It's out of the way, but easy to check. And no stupid moving parts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 12:00:06 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The best chamber indicator I have seen is the one Ruger put on the LCP. It's out of the way, but easy to check. And no stupid moving parts. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.JeHylPaOwEYhDWcunqrNqAHaDB%26pid%3DApi&f=1 Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Some idiot decided to put the Loaded Chamber Indicator directly in line with the front sight...and yes it partially obscures the front sight. https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-kp97pt369w/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/2263/5232/SVimg-KP38233-LCI__85271.1515511824.jpg?c=2 The best chamber indicator I have seen is the one Ruger put on the LCP. It's out of the way, but easy to check. And no stupid moving parts. https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.JeHylPaOwEYhDWcunqrNqAHaDB%26pid%3DApi&f=1 That ones good. Glock has a raised extractor ledge as well as a sort of LCI, at least on newer models.  I really like the one on the FN Five seveN; its a 1mm BB that pops up. You can run your hand over it in the dark to confirm the chamber is loaded, but its otherwise totally unobtrusive. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2021 3:28:11 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Keep in mind the U.S. didn't go monster bayonet when they got a modern rifle. They tried this abortion instead: https://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/uploads/monthly_08_2014/post-68-0-13820100-1409094439.jpg I personally find it hilarious that they bought some Mausers, played with them, decided to smash some Krag features on to them, and then got sued by Mauser. If we hadn't gotten involved in WW1, we'd have paid patent royalties to Mauser until the patents expired. This is extra funny in threads here about people "ripping off" firearms patents. I got nearly cruxified for suggesting magpul's main patent is pretty weak, and depends on the exact shape of the "fake bullet" on the follower. Meanwhile, U.S. Ordinance straight up ripped off Mauser and got bent over in court. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The sight was corrected but they felt that this awesome new range potential meant that they could not only dramatically increase their max range but they would, as a result, also dramatically increase their decisive range. If you start shooting at them twice as fast away then the closest you expect them to get is also twice as far away, right? That's just science. They were incorrect. They weren't the only ones. It is funny that the ordnance department could have this perception while also having a massive pigsticker to go with the rifle. Our soldiers will always route the enemy forces from hundreds of meters away! But in case that doesn't work, they can also stab them. There is no in-between. The answer is a lot more nuanced than you seem to think, when smokeless powder was first introduced, everyone still stuck with full length infantry rifles, and typically had bayonets of reasonable length. It wouldn't be till the universal short rifle concept came around that you see the monster short swords come into popularity. Why? Cavalry. Until WW1 brought modern artillery and MG's to the fight, cavalry was still a major factor. Not only are guys on horses fast, having a short gun and short knife is less appealing than a short gun with a long knife. Today we look at sights that bottom out at 200 yards and scoff, but it's not going to make a difference. The Germans were an exception, but history is littered with terrible German small arms decisions https://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/uploads/monthly_08_2014/post-68-0-13820100-1409094439.jpg I personally find it hilarious that they bought some Mausers, played with them, decided to smash some Krag features on to them, and then got sued by Mauser. If we hadn't gotten involved in WW1, we'd have paid patent royalties to Mauser until the patents expired. This is extra funny in threads here about people "ripping off" firearms patents. I got nearly cruxified for suggesting magpul's main patent is pretty weak, and depends on the exact shape of the "fake bullet" on the follower. Meanwhile, U.S. Ordinance straight up ripped off Mauser and got bent over in court. The US got sued over illegally seizing the patent for the spitzer bullet. US Ord. Was aware that the 1903 might infringe on mausers patents for the rifle and the clips, and let mauser know. Negotiations were rather amicable. We were done paying them well before WW1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2021 1:49:51 PM EDT
[#40]
Another one I have never understood is why the rear sight protective ears on the Garand and M14 are so short.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2021 2:20:19 PM EDT
[#41]
Grip and ergo wise: The Glock grip angle completely doesn’t fit me. The stock AKs paint brush grip is horrid too. The M16a2 stock grip with a gap to the trigger guard was annoying but having been in the Army I do get why it was made that way.
Controls- The “too many controls” MK23 stands out to me. Great gun but it was like a Russian tractor as it had a different lever for every damn function. Ak safety “improvements” can be as annoying as the stock safety. Not a huge fan of slide mounted slide mounted manual safeties but they can be worked around. Poor trigger - this list is vast but the real low points are Nagant revolvers, S&W Sigma, and almost every Keltec I have handled. Many bolt guns made before all the factory adjustable triggers were developed were horrid. You often swapped the trigger out before putting a scope on it. Sights - top of my list is the “very cool in theory” guttersnipe sights from the ASP. I have owned 3 of them and you might as well just be point shooting. Accuracy is not attainable with them. Runner up is the cast in or machined in tiny vestigial lumps on some pocket pistols. I carry Sigs because no matter how small the pistol they have adult sized sights. Stocks - If it’s not adjustable for length it gets a big minus in my book. Too long is worse than too short except with a magnified optic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2021 6:00:22 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Another one I have never understood is why the rear sight protective ears on the Garand and M14 are so short. They are long enough to protect the sight with a 100 yard zero, and aren't likely to get caught on stuff |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2021 8:17:14 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The man that designed the rifle / M16 even said it shouldnt be there. And I place him next to JMB on the mantle of firearms development Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Honestly, between extremely hot dry and dusty environments and user error, every serious war rifle should have a forward assist, even if it's rarely used. It’s rarely used, takes up little to no valuable space. But when it is used, it needs to be used. Yes, you don’t want to use it if you have an obstruction. But if your bolt is just ever so slightly out of battery due to excessive dryness during initial charging, or operator error during charging, it can be useful to encourage the bolt to go fully into battery. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2021 8:37:34 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Mk IV hinge should have been the case since the Mk II. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The take down lever on ruger 22 pistols should have been made different. The Mk IV hinge should have been the case since the Mk II. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2021 8:52:01 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll stand up in defense of the AR/M-16 forward assist. It's a very specific circumstance, but if you want to quietly charge the rifle, and you ride the charging handle forward, you'll often need to push the forward assist to get the bolt fully closed and the round into battery. Should you already be locked and loaded when the enemy isn't nearby? Sure, but I can see it happening. And letting the charging handle/bolt fly forward full-force does not seem like a good idea while you're hiding in ambush position. There is a scoop cut from the carrier for a reason. That is to give you a spot to push the carrier closed with your thumb. This should be plenty to quietly close a bolt without giving you the option to ram a stuck round harder into the chamber. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2021 1:27:17 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the stock didn't "boop" out 1/4 inch when you hit the release, you would have to use both hands to retract/extend it..... one maintaining pressure on the release lever , while the other extends it.... I'm not sure how you're opening the stock, but you wouldn't have to use both hands to open it without the spring. You don't have to with it, and you wouldn't without it (unless you have the '3/4 position' stock...then you're fucked). |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File