For the T1B "Gun Club"...
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 8:54 pm
Any of you peeps ever fired Russian hardware? (or Chinese/Eastern Bloc).
My nephew bought a Mosin Nagant 7.62 bolt action rifle. I shot it a few times. Pretty decent gun in my opinion. Action felt good, smooth, no problems, nice balance easy to shoot. Fairly accurate with it the first time I ever shot it.Martyred wrote:Any of you peeps ever fired Russian hardware? (or Chinese/Eastern Bloc).
Derron wrote:"jamb"
the great thing about the AK. It is pretty much jamb proof. purposely built as loose as M2's asshole. not much of a sniper rifle, but, that is not what it was made for.Derron wrote:My nephew bought a Mosin Nagant 7.62 bolt action rifle. I shot it a few times. Pretty decent gun in my opinion. Action felt good, smooth, no problems, nice balance easy to shoot. Fairly accurate with it the first time I ever shot it.Martyred wrote:Any of you peeps ever fired Russian hardware? (or Chinese/Eastern Bloc).
Another of the boys friends brought over some Chinese AK knockoff. Pretty bare bones, weapon, going to have to put a few rounds through it to get the feel and handle of it. Still pretty bad ass for a 7.62. Shot a Romanian one too. They seemed pretty decent. Cheaply built, but never had a "jamb" or misfire. Not as smooth shooting as the AR, but a lot more caliber too. Not in the same quality level as the Mosin though.
I would own one of those Mosins. They are pretty reasonable on armslist.com.
Exactly. Put a lot of large caliber bullets range down range real fucking fast.smackaholic wrote:
the great thing about the AK. It is pretty much jamb proof. purposely built as loose as M2's asshole. not much of a sniper rifle, but, that is not what it was made for.
Oh, c'mon!Derron wrote:armslist.com
Derron wrote:
Another of the boys friends brought over some Chinese AK knockoff.
Martyred wrote:A friend of mine bought an SKS with a shit ton of ammo for about $200 two years ago.
I was surprised at how small it actually is.
I take it the 64 stands for the average number of minutes it takes one of the testers to chamber a round from the clip after each shot.Polish P-64
I have delivered the news to a Russian that we were letting him go, although I wasn't the one who made the decision.Martyred wrote:Any of you peeps ever fired Russian
more likely the year it went into the people's service. it's a fine weapon. you could easily blow your brains out with one. you should give it a try, comradeToddowen wrote:I take it the 64 stands for the average number of minutes it takes one of the testers to chamber a round from the clip after each shot.Polish P-64
I would've thought it would stand for the average number of post between Cuda actually replying with one of his own.Cuda wrote:
more likely the year it went into the people's service.
Left Seater wrote:I have delivered the news to a Russian that we were letting him go...Martyred wrote:Any of you peeps ever fired Russian
Cuda wrote:I got one of these Polish P-64 in 9mm Makarov.
No LTS, it had far more to do with his inability to stop pucks from finding the back of the net he was allegedly defending.Martyred wrote:Left Seater wrote:I have delivered the news to a Russian that we were letting him go...Martyred wrote:Any of you peeps ever fired Russian
It was because he refused to believe the totally fake narrative about Muslims flying planes into the WTC, right?
IT'S BECAUSE HE BROUGHT UP THE LOGICAL HYPOTHESIS THAT CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS BROUGHT THE TOWERS DOWN!
Answer me, damn you! Are you also part of the cabal!?!?
:x
mvscal wrote:Yeah. I fired just about everything the Iraqis had. AKs (genuine pieces of shit) mostly. Also fired ZPU-2s and 4s which were fun as fuck.
And I would bet that those genuine pieces of shit would still do what they were made to do, put lead down range. This is why they are one of the best weapons ever made. They are absolutely jamb proof no matter what sort abuse they are subject to at the hands of monkeys.mvscal wrote:Yeah. I fired just about everything the Iraqis had. AKs (genuine pieces of shit) mostly. Also fired ZPU-2s and 4s which were fun as fuck.
smackaholic wrote:...no matter what sort abuse they are subject to at the hands of monkeys.
The Iraqis made a lot of knock offs of the Romanian PSL. They weren't uncommon.Martyred wrote:mvscal wrote:Yeah. I fired just about everything the Iraqis had. AKs (genuine pieces of shit) mostly. Also fired ZPU-2s and 4s which were fun as fuck.
Was the Dragunov standard issue with the drop-ass conscripts, or strictly Republican Guard gear?
No, it isn't. It's a piece of shit. The Soviets dumped it in the early 70s.smackaholic wrote:This is why they are one of the best weapons ever made.
It fills its role as a guerrilla fighter weapon perfectly in that it is more or less indestructable. There are far better weapons for properly trained troops who actually maintain weapons.mvscal wrote:No, it isn't. It's a piece of shit. The Soviets dumped it in the early 70s.smackaholic wrote:This is why they are one of the best weapons ever made.
They didn't dump the AK design, they just re-barreled it for an inferior round. They dumped the vastly superior 7.62x39 round in favor of what was essentially a copy of the 5.56 Nato round- which has proven itself inferior and pretty much inadequate in both Iraq, and Afcrapistan.mvscal wrote:No, it isn't. It's a piece of shit. The Soviets dumped it in the early 70s.smackaholic wrote:This is why they are one of the best weapons ever made.
Wrong.Cuda wrote:the 5.56 Nato round- which has proven itself inferior and pretty much inadequate in both Iraq, and Afcrapistan.
Do you happen to own either of those weapons ? Or have any experience at all with them in a comparative manner?Cunta wrote:They didn't dump the AK design, they just re-barreled it for an inferior round. They dumped the vastly superior 7.62x39 round in favor of what was essentially a copy of the 5.56 Nato round- which has proven itself inferior and pretty much inadequate in both Iraq, and Afcrapistan.mvscal wrote:No, it isn't. It's a piece of shit. The Soviets dumped it in the early 70s.smackaholic wrote:This is why they are one of the best weapons ever made.
They brought it back because the 5.56 was proving itself inadequate on the battlefield.mvscal wrote:They didn't bring M14s back to shoot through cinderblocks and cardoors, dumbass.
That's because there aren't sufficient numbers of M1A/M14's available anymore nearly 50 years after McNamara and his whiz kids, approved the M16. The M1 Garand was the primary service rifle until the M14 came along and both it and the BAR fired the 30.06 cartridge, which is slightly more powerful than the .308. There really wasn't any great need for the M14 to replace the BAR other than cost of manufacture, and the fact that NATO wanted everybody to standardize on the .308 round used by the FAL. What there really wasn't any need for was to replace the proven Garand based M14 with the flawed design of the M16. The big problem troops had with the M14 was using it full auto. After a few decades, they figured out one of the problems with the M16 was using it full auto. Another problem was just plain shitty design. It's still the only weapon made that has (or even needs) a forward assist to force the bolt into battery when it has a mis-feed.There is certainly role for the 7.62x51 on the battlefield. That role is not as the round for a primary service rifle.
Horseshit, Corporal mvscal. If the full auto M16 was so fucking great, why did it evolve into the M4 that's restricted to 3 round bursts?The M16 and M4 are outstanding weapons and their longevity is more than enough proof of that.
For the same reason they use a relatively small round. Some fukking shmuck has to carry that shit in the field. Having a smaller round and 3 round bursts means you will still be shooting when the fukker on the other side who has been lobbing big heavy rounds in full auto, is out of ammo.Cuda wrote:Horseshit, Corporal mvscal. If the full auto M16 was so fucking great, why did it evolve into the M4 that's restricted to 3 round bursts?
They brought it back because the fighting in western Iraq and most especially in Afghanistan exposed a doctrinal weakness in our force structure. A significant number of engagements were happening beyond the effective range of the M4 exposing the need for a designated marksman at the squad level. The role has nothing to do with shooting through cinderblocks. When we want to chew up some masonry we use a 240. The M14 is used exclusively for precision shooting in the ~500 meter range.Cuda wrote:They brought it back because the 5.56 was proving itself inadequate on the battlefield.
That's because there aren't sufficient numbers of M1A/M14's available anymore nearly 50 years after McNamara and his whiz kids, approved the M16.
If the full auto M16 was so fucking great, why did it evolve into the M4 that's restricted to 3 round bursts?
More bullshit. It's teething problems were solved long before the end of Vietnam. It sounds like you've read one too many anonymously sourced chain emails that are invariably exposed as hoaxes and frauds by anybody who actually knows what they're talking about ie not you.It's "longevity" has largely been in peacetime. In battle, it was used less than 10 years in Vietnam (where it was such a piece of shit that anybody who could do so, refused to carry it), a few days worth of battle in Grenada, a few months worth of battle in Desert Storm, and now a dozen years in Iraq and Afcrapistan, where, once again, anybody in a position to do so, carries an M14.
Boar meat can be horrifically foul. It will smell like it has been marinaded in stale piss. It is a pheremone produced in the nuts of adult boars and accumulates in the fat. It doesn't happen in all boars and not all humans are sensitive to it. I had tainted boar meat once and it put me off pork for a couple months. It was truly vile.smackaholic wrote:You are surprised that pig tastes good?
I challenge anyone to rebut that statement.young females always make the best eating.