Hosted by gatnerd
This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 6:14 by gatnerd
Latest 4:04 by autogun
Latest 2:20 by gatnerd
Latest 0:45 by gatnerd
Latest 0:10 by gatnerd
Latest 29-Mar by stancrist
Latest 29-Mar by autogun
Latest 28-Mar by stancrist
Latest 28-Mar by Farmplinker
Latest 27-Mar by smg762
Latest 26-Mar by EmericD
Latest 26-Mar by stancrist
Latest 25-Mar by nincomp
Latest 23-Mar by graylion
Latest 23-Mar by mpopenker
Latest 21-Mar by ZailC
Latest 21-Mar by graylion
Latest 21-Mar by graylion
Latest 18-Mar by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 15-Mar by JPeelen
Latest 13-Mar by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 13-Mar by schnuersi
Latest 13-Mar by Jeff (Jefffar)
Latest 13-Mar by Refleks
Latest 12-Mar by graylion
Latest 11-Mar by graylion
Latest 10-Mar by graylion
Latest 10-Mar by Farmplinker
Latest 9-Mar by graylion
Latest 7-Mar by schnuersi
Latest 6-Mar by graylion
Latest 6-Mar by Farmplinker
Latest 5-Mar by gatnerd
Latest 5-Mar by Farmplinker
Latest 3-Mar by Farmplinker
Latest 3-Mar by Farmplinker
Thats interesting that the standard loadout is 5 mags. The US typically carries 7x. Is that based on the previous G3 loadout being 5 mags, or a desire to keep weight to a certain limit? Or just 150rd being a nice number of rounds?
Propably the first two combined.
With the G3 5 magazines for 100 ready rounds have been standard issue since more or less the rearmament. 100 rds is the same number of ready rounds that rifleman during the war had for their K98. This apparently seems sufficient.
SMGgunners got and still get 7 magazines.
Since one of the main arguments for a new rifle to replace the G3 had been weight reduction the propably stuck with 5 magazines to get the best possible or easiest comparable result.
When you say 2 reloads, do you mean soldiers are running a 3x mag coupling?
Yes. With the middle one inserted into the gun.
While i have been a vocal proponent of the ''folding stock master race'' lately a development by one of my friends of a drop-in balanced action for AR ( patenting right now so will be unveiled in couple months)kinda got me thinking....... there are still ways to go.
Unfortunately, snow, icing, sand, mud... can "lock" this small button and the forward assist function is no longer there, generally when you need it. I'm with Stan on this point, a reciprocating charging handle could be a hindrance when the rifle is running well (at the range, for example), but being able to manually work the bolt with some leverage is a big "plus" if you have a case stuck in the chamber, or after being dropped by a helicopter in "brown out" conditions..
It seems Steyr agreed; the A3 AUG does away with the little button in favor of this method:
The CZ Bren 2 has a non-reciprocating charging handle with forward assist ability as well, although I haven't been able to find a source for how it works.
In terms of stuck cases or rifles dropped from helicopters, is that really a forward assist issue, or rather a rearward retraction leverage issue?
Typically when a case is stuck you're trying to yank it out by retracting the charging handle to rear to eject the case, not trying to mash the stuck case further into the chamber?
Mr. T (MrT4) said:
While i have been a vocal proponent of the ''folding stock master race'' lately a development by one of my friends of a drop-in balanced action for AR ( patenting right now so will be unveiled in couple months)kinda got me thinking....... there are still ways to go
Ooo that sounds very cool. Please keep us updated for when it gets announced.
Really, you hated the AR t charging handle?
I'm left handed when it comes to rifles, and while I admit I at minimum have big latch charging handles on my AR's, and one with an ambi latch, I can still operate a milspec small latch charging handle wrong handed just fine even to clear malfunctions!
And that's before we discuss modern optics, mounting them, and still being able to charge your gun while not having the charging handle dig into your back while your rifle is slung...
Because that's exactly what my AK charging handles do, which are objectively REALLY SUPREMELY CONVENIENT since I shoot lefty and can thus charge my gun with my primary hand still on the pistol grip!
And then there's the forward assist which is again pretty convenient for me because I shoot lefty and it's paired with the famous brunton bump shell deflector which mostly keeps me from getting hit with hot spent brass while not digging into my back, or the backs of right handers while slung.
To me avoiding that discomfort etc while carrying the gun which you'll be doing much more than shooting it is pretty valuable.
Is it valuable enough to justify the inconvenience some people find in the t charging handle?
That's something everyone has to decide for themselves, but for Me even though the t handle is technically even more inconvenient for me I find it to be one of the things I like most.
So as an interesting aside to the whole 3 functions in one thing, there were actually di AR's with a non reciprocating charging handle that did also function as a forward assist etc...
Specifically I'm referring to the ar10a which stoner helped the Dutch develop but never reached production sadly which fixed problems with the AR we're still fighting today!
I've hoped against hope that somebody would eventually redevelop the solution stoner had already figured out 50 years ago but so far no luck.
Interestingly the bren 2 integrated forward assist is very similar to what stoner did with the ar10a integrated forward assist charging handle he developed with the Dutch
So far this balanced action thingy has about ten thousand rounds of testing through and it looks like something that could eventually find itself even on service rifles as its very simple and best part is its doesn't effect reliability, even if the counterbalancing would somehow gunk up and lockup, it will just continue work minus the balancing function till its cleared.
While i think 5.56 might not really need counterbalancing or gain much (outside the competition circuit),this could well be useful in calibers with more recoil, 6ARC .308 or new .277fury
stancrist said: "fullfills the function of three seperate controls of the AR15: charging handle, bolt release, forward assist."
Those are desirable characteristics. However, you don't need the handle to be reciprocating for that to be achieved.
The AUG A1 for examples charging handle is non-reciprocating, but still functions as a bolt release and forward assist. You just press the little button on the CH and it engages the forward assist.
I would submit that the AUG A1 has two controls, not just one. As on the AR15, the AUG A1 forward assist is a separate control, but it's installed into the charging handle instead of the receiver.
Reciprocating has generally fallen out of favor as...the moving charging handle limits where the hand can be placed.
I think that is not a real issue on most rifles with reciprocating bolt handles.
The handle is located where the support hand would not be placed anyway.
Stan, you're one of the only gun guys I know who prefers reciprocating charging handles...
I think to a degree this is a personal preference thing, and being honest I'm kinda surprised you prefer a reciprocating charging handle.
But hey you like what you like man and I have to say the ak is a fun little machine (that's why I have 3 of them and will be getting one more within the next year or two. A buddy is gonna sell me his early manufacture Kalashnikov USA kr103)
That said, the market appears to heavily disagree with you, the SCAR NRCH being a prime example.
From a gun design and complexity standpoint I also have to say that this "extra features and controls" thing is really an extremely minor concern from a gun design and manufacturing standpoint.
As far as the ice and mud "freezing controls up" thing, proper design and implementation can mitigate most to all of it as seen in the Aug a3 simplification.
To a degree we're at a weird point in history where gun design has basically frozen for several decades and it warps our perception