Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 7/1/2002 5:13:56 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 5:19:53 PM EST
Been there, done that...Wok'd the dog.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 5:22:52 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 5:24:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 5:27:12 PM EST
Originally Posted By Slacker: Been there, done that...Wok'd the dog.
View Quote
bwahhahaha!!! wok'd the dog. i get it. personally i think the daewoo is kinda ugly, but i heard relaiable as hell.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 6:43:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/1/2002 6:45:21 PM EST by ArmdLbrl]
Gee, scaled down .223 version of a FAL upper mated to a AR-15 clone lower. Yeah I would think it would be reliable. Only problem is they built the rear sight into the receiver. Sure it won't break there- but neither can update it out of the stone age. No place for optics. Korea still uses 20 round mags? Why? Or are these just MP's or some other rear area types and not real infantry?
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 6:48:56 PM EST
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: Gee, scaled down .223 version of a FAL upper mated to a AR-15 clone lower. Yeah I would think it would be reliable.
View Quote
I was under the impression that the upper is closer to that of an AK than a FAL.
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 7:04:33 PM EST
Originally Posted By Scarecrow:
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: Gee, scaled down .223 version of a FAL upper mated to a AR-15 clone lower. Yeah I would think it would be reliable.
View Quote
I was under the impression that the upper is closer to that of an AK than a FAL.
View Quote
Why? Cause of the hooded front sight?
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 7:21:22 PM EST
ArmdLbrl: "Only problem is they built the rear sight into the receiver. Sure it won't break there- but neither can update it out of the stone age. No place for optics." Actually there are 2 threaded bushings in the top of the reciever. (You can see one in the photo just ahead of the bolt knob) It is a very simple matter to attach a weaver or picatinny rail and it works well. A true flattop would be better, but the Daewoo does have evolutionary potential. Overall, these are solid "soldier rifles".
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 7:27:25 PM EST
Link Posted: 7/1/2002 7:29:38 PM EST
Originally Posted By sharpsrifle: ArmdLbrl: "Only problem is they built the rear sight into the receiver. Sure it won't break there- but neither can update it out of the stone age. No place for optics." Actually there are 2 threaded bushings in the top of the reciever. (You can see one in the photo just ahead of the bolt knob) It is a very simple matter to attach a weaver or picatinny rail and it works well. A true flattop would be better, but the Daewoo does have evolutionary potential. Overall, these are solid "soldier rifles".
View Quote
A rail like on this D300? [img]http://world.guns.ru/assault/daewoo_dr300.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 7/2/2002 7:19:40 PM EST
[b]A rail like on this D300? [/b] I've never seen one mounted that high before. All the ones I've seen have been much lower and closer to the reciever. They allow the see "the sights through the dot sight" set up as the gooseneck mounts of a fixed handle AR-15. There is no reason that the rail can't extend over the hanguard as well.
Link Posted: 7/3/2002 2:41:05 AM EST
Had one for several years, but had to sell it for financial reasons, and wish I had it back. Very fine weapon, essentially combining the best of the AR, AK, and FN designs. The only lousy thing in the whole design is the fore end which is slippery as hell. If they'd used ribs, as in the M16A2, it would be a whole lot easier to control. Interestingly, The standard US GI .22LR conversion unit can be modified to work in the Daewoo, and does a very fine job. Oh well, another good gun that got away. Story of my life. [:D]
Link Posted: 7/3/2002 3:20:37 AM EST
Ah dont feel too bad about selling...I was in a warehouse filled with them back in the early 80's...and they were going for $289 ...and I didnt buy one.
Top Top