Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    Posts
    1,915

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    Beam, it has been discussed on here ad nauseam that there is an enormous elephant in the room when it comes to bullpup designs: it is impossible to fire around the left side of cover without exposing yourself. This is one of the (several) reasons why relatively few armies have adopted them.

    I have also yet to handle a bullpup which balances "better" than an out the box AR 15 -- most of them are exceedingly back heavy which makes them seem easier to carry, but they are universally ghastly to shoot with.

    Interestingly, the Israelis have adopted a bullpup and have done the opposite of what every other army in the world does with a new weapon system: they have issued it to new recruits rather than to the older professional soldiers who have grown up with the M-16/M4. A cynical view to take is that they have done this to avoid the inevitable bitching which ALWAYS happens when an army replaces a trusted conventional weapon with a bullpup, since the recruits don't know any better. If there genuinely was an increase in performance, don't you think the Israelis would have issued it first to their crack professional troops?

    As for cost, don't think for a minute that an HK 416 is cheaper than any of the bullpup designs currently in production -- it is an extremely expensive piece of kit, yet the performance improvement is worth it. Provided the cost issue doesn't put people off, expect the 416 to become the de facto standard.
    1884 electric cartridge. Look similar to anything?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    90

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    I have seen one bullpup the ejects spent cartridges out the bottom of the weapon and I'd love to see a bullpup like the SAR-21 with that modification as the rest of the rifle is ambidextrous. (One final mod I would make would be to put in a selector switch in the same position and style as the M-16.)

    Then you'd have a truly powerful weapon and since I can fire ambidextrously with minimal loss in performance, firing from the left side of a barricade would not have the unfortunate side effect of getting hot cases in your face. (It's to distracting, I agree!)

    I must admit, I feel in love with the FAMAS the first time I fired one and saw instantly saw the advantages of having a SMG legth weapon that packs the punch of an assault rifle for clearing rooms.

    Incidentally, I will say I never liked firing the AK-47 and will concede the M-16 feels far more comfortable to shoot. That said, I find some bullpups way more comfortable to shoot and the balance agrees with me.

    I will also say, I'd be hoping that a bottom ejecting bullpup would limit on disadvantage I have found: when firing a lot of rounds, the fumes sting my eyes... something I've never had with a long rifle.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,403

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBeam View Post
    I have seen one bullpup the ejects spent cartridges out the bottom of the weapon and I'd love to see a bullpup like the SAR-21 with that modification as the rest of the rifle is ambidextrous. (One final mod I would make would be to put in a selector switch in the same position and style as the M-16.)

    Then you'd have a truly powerful weapon and since I can fire ambidextrously with minimal loss in performance, firing from the left side of a barricade would not have the unfortunate side effect of getting hot cases in your face. (It's to distracting, I agree!)

    I must admit, I feel in love with the FAMAS the first time I fired one and saw instantly saw the advantages of having a SMG legth weapon that packs the punch of an assault rifle for clearing rooms.

    Incidentally, I will say I never liked firing the AK-47 and will concede the M-16 feels far more comfortable to shoot. That said, I find some bullpups way more comfortable to shoot and the balance agrees with me.

    I will also say, I'd be hoping that a bottom ejecting bullpup would limit on disadvantage I have found: when firing a lot of rounds, the fumes sting my eyes... something I've never had with a long rifle.
    The M-16/M-4 is also A LOT more accurate than the AK, and has greater range. As I said, the AK, while ideal for some of the close in jungle fighting American troops faced in 'Nam, is inferior overall if both weapons are being handled by motivated professionals....

    Incidentally, the M-16 also has better stopping power due to its horrific ballistic wounding characteristics in some circumstances, whereas the AK's 7.62mm short round loses velocity as has little more stopping power than a 9mm at medium ranges...

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,403

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    Quote Originally Posted by boberamatheclown View Post
    .30 M1 rifle!
    Um, okay...

    H&K G3!

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Koninkrijk der Nederlanden
    Posts
    1,915

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    Right, I did the 7.62 NATO to 7.62 x 39 cartridge conversion last night, and it was a bit of a ***. i had to use a file to reduce the rim and web diameter, and I discovered another problem: the extractor groove needs to be deepened. this was also a bit of a pain with the file. with a lathe I could have done it far faster, and would probably manage 10 to 15 cartridges an hour. Having done one, I would do it like this now:

    1. Progressively size NATO case until the web reaches the bottom of the die.
    2. Put case in lathe, base outwards, turn rim and web down to correct diameter at correct taper.
    3. Deepen extractor groove
    4. Size case fully.
    5. Using Dremel or lathe, trim case to a little over 39 mm
    6. Use a Lee case trimmer to finish trimming, then chamfer.

    Alternatively, steps five and six could be done just on the lathe if you make a little jig to reference the position of the base of the cartridge in the chuck.
    1884 electric cartridge. Look similar to anything?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    90

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    Wow! Man of Stoat: That is a ton of work converting the bullets. Obviously, 15 bullets an hour is way to slow to be practical on a war footing...unless you're a sniper. An AK-47 wielding sniper. lol! (An SKS would be the obvious 'era' choice here.) It would take a day of work just to get 100 rounds.

    And I thought loading my own bullets was a lot of work...that's hardcore. Good work and thanks for that post!

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,087

    Default Re: Ak-47 & M16 what do you think? And explain

    In each case, AK 47, AK74 and M16 and Car15 (grandson, but relevant) I have handled said weapons, though, being in politically correct and thus backward NZ, not fired, each weapon.
    My choice would be AK series.
    Why?
    In a little known experiment, NZ Army buried in wet tidal sand an AK, left it there for 14 weeks, right next to an M16.
    Dug up, pull-through put through the barrel, loaded and cocked, the AK went full out auto NO problems. About 5 mags' worth.
    The M16 .... same treatment... jammed at shot 5.
    From this, I conclude the AK to be the better weapon.
    Esoterics of ballistics and cartridges/grainages/bullet loadings aside: the AK has to come out on top in terms of pure operability.

    (Edit: I find it significantly worthy of note: in Vietnam many regular troops ditched the issued M16 as soon as possible and employed AK's instead. Plainly this says that "word had got around" and men preferred the chance of living, over the chance of dieing from a weapon jam at an inopportune moment. Granted, the XM177 Prototype didn't suffer the same catalogue of ills that its' M16 offpsring did, but the fact the M16 was ditched or carried unused suggests much in regards to the view taken of it by those it was issued to.)

    A marksman can always be trained to good shooting and habits, regardless of weapon. The weapon itself has to be the "in combat" criterion, because a properly trained operator will achieve with it things the basic "grunt" will not. There, I agree with previously stated opinion.

    Regards, Uyraell.
    Last edited by Uyraell; 02-12-2009 at 12:43 AM.

    "Honi-Soit Qui Mal'Y Pense." :
    "Ill unto he who ill of it thinks."
    Edward III, Rex Britania, AD1348.

    "Wenn Schon, denn schon."
    "Be It Done, Best be It Be Done Well."
    Known German adage.

    "Until you have looked into a veteran's eyes and actually seen it,
    you'll never fully understand."
    ^Uyraell^

    "Aligaes : Amore vel Ira." :
    "^Winged Ones^ : Love or Wrath."

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •