Sydney
2λчиэλ
+783|6813|Reykjavík, Iceland.

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

It's called the StG-44, not the MP-43.
its the Mp-43 the Mp-44 or the STG-44 they all the same rifle
Bleh. StG-44 makes it sound cooler.
Mp-43 was the original prototype, Mp-44 was the standard issue version of it, Stg-44 was a nickname that Hitler himself gave it IIRC.

liquix wrote:

I would vote the ak-47. Reason being, it is extremely widespread and uses a 7.62 whereas many other semi-modern rifles use a 5.56. Another reason is its balance between: reliability, power, and cost effectiveness. If that weapon did not exist, I would choose the m1 garand
Dont underestimate low-caliber round, I'd prefer getting hit by a 7.62 kalashni round anyday before a 5.56mm NATO round, the NATO rounds fragment inside you do do maximum damage.

Last edited by PBAsydney (2006-12-05 15:58:57)

Raptor1
Member
+19|6458
Kar98K, G36, M-4
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|6565|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

Raptor1 wrote:

Kar98K, G36, M-4
you have much to learn young one.
acEofspadEs6313
Shiny! Let's be bad guys.
+102|6662|NAS Jacksonville, Florida

seymorebutts443 wrote:

Raptor1 wrote:

Kar98K, G36, M-4
you have much to learn young one.
Eh, G36 is relatively new. I wouldn't take that weapon, personally.
Janja
Jiggaboo Jones
+11|6352|FLOOR E DUH
ak101 yay.

yuckfou09
hide your terrorists ^,^
+94|6646|Ft. Drum, NY

PBAsydney wrote:

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:


its the Mp-43 the Mp-44 or the STG-44 they all the same rifle
Bleh. StG-44 makes it sound cooler.
Mp-43 was the original prototype, Mp-44 was the standard issue version of it, Stg-44 was a nickname that Hitler himself gave it IIRC.

liquix wrote:

I would vote the ak-47. Reason being, it is extremely widespread and uses a 7.62 whereas many other semi-modern rifles use a 5.56. Another reason is its balance between: reliability, power, and cost effectiveness. If that weapon did not exist, I would choose the m1 garand
Dont underestimate low-caliber round, I'd prefer getting hit by a 7.62 kalashni round anyday before a 5.56mm NATO round, the NATO rounds fragment inside you do do maximum damage.
you realize that the 7.62x39 round the ak fires is a tumbler round right? Whch means it tumbles end over end like a football at kickoff. But you are semi correct about the .223 or 5.56 NATO round the M-16 shoot. It tends to bounce of bones and fragment.
Brasso
member
+1,549|6600

Cougar wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Cougar wrote:


.....ohh God.. are you fucking serious?
Not sure.   Why would they not be the best rifle?
You're obviously not someone who has had to maintain or shoot M16's for long periods of time.  However, just saying "M-16 implies that you are talking about a standard model Vietnam era M-16, which were a blatent waste of barrels and plastic if you ask me.  The M-16A2 is much better, but still a piece of shit.

1. They jam....all the fucking time.
2. They break....all the fucking time.
3. If you barrell overheats, plan on replacing it and everything it was touching.
4. Sand, mud, and water are like cyanide to the gun.
5. It isn't even that accurate.
6. It has a complicated construction that makes stripping the gun down to core components a pain in the ass.
7. Lots of other shit.

Ironically, the M-4 is an awesome weapon.  Go figure.
I didn't know that.  Thanks.
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
Janja
Jiggaboo Jones
+11|6352|FLOOR E DUH
just kidding^^^^^^^
R0lyP0ly
Member
+161|6623|USA
AK-47 is the most popular weapon worldwide. Naming a 'best rifle' is hard to answer, since many factors go into making that kind of decision. With that said, you must decide for the advantages it has outweigh that of others, others may choose different qualities. Nobody can truly be correct.

My vote goes for any H&K or Israeli/Galil wpn. They are without a doubt the best arms manufacturers in the world.
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|6565|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA
you have to factor in service life, reliability, power, range, ROF, ammo capacity, and cost.
R0lyP0ly
Member
+161|6623|USA

seymorebutts443 wrote:

you have to factor in service life, reliability, power, range, ROF, ammo capacity, and cost.
Kalashnikov series, hands down.
seymorebutts443
Ready for combat
+211|6565|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA
no doubt, almost any AK can destroy the competition
Longbow
Member
+163|6616|Odessa, Ukraine
G36
AK-103
M16A3/A4
Stg.77(AUG)
Mariena
Blondes have more fun
+52|6439|The Netherlands
SVT-38/40, hands down.

.. only because I can't choose "sniper rifles", namely the TRG-42 I own (Seriously, would it still be considered a sniper rifle to the general public (like, cough, BF2s) if I take the scope off?).
Major.League.Infidel
Make Love and War
+303|6448|Communist Republic of CA, USA

Miller wrote:

Cougar wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

M16.
.....ohh God.. are you fucking serious?
Are you serious??? The M16 is a well built rifle.... Was the XM8 cancelled by the US Military??? I would like to use that when I enlist.
The .223 round of an m16 isn't big enough these days, especially in close warfare.  Personally I prefer the 6.8mm round, but that's me.  And yes the XM8 was cancelled, because it was a piece of shit.
JE3146
Member
+109|6541|Oregon

Cougar wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Cougar wrote:

.....ohh God.. are you fucking serious?
Not sure.   Why would they not be the best rifle?
You're obviously not someone who has had to maintain or shoot M16's for long periods of time.  However, just saying "M-16 implies that you are talking about a standard model Vietnam era M-16, which were a blatent waste of barrels and plastic if you ask me.  The M-16A2 is much better, but still a piece of shit.

1. They jam....all the fucking time.
2. They break....all the fucking time.
3. If you barrell overheats, plan on replacing it and everything it was touching.
4. Sand, mud, and water are like cyanide to the gun.
5. It isn't even that accurate.
6. It has a complicated construction that makes stripping the gun down to core components a pain in the ass.
7. Lots of other shit.

Ironically, the M-4 is an awesome weapon.  Go figure.
It's called a carbine gas system with a higher pressure spike in the direct gas impingment pressure regression....

This high pressure spike also leads to part fatigue, which was why the midlength gas system was created.

And ironic isn't the word... the gas system makes the weapon.   +/- .001" around the gas port can make the difference between a reliable weapon and a malfunctioning peice of shit.

1) They don't jam... all the fucking time. A "Jam" is a term used when the rifle becomes completely unservicable. Rifles often "malfunction," but rarely do they "jam." A "jam" is so severe, it needs an armorer to fix the rifle before it can be rendered servicable. A malfunction can be cleared by a soldier easily. Give a soldier anything and he'll make it malfunction. AK's even malfunction in a soldier's hands.
2) They break? Enlighten me... Extractors? What are you referring to?
3) Milspec barrels are made of 4150 steel and chrome lined. (Aka.. DESIGNED for EXTREME heat and wear) If they overheat, your accuracy degrades momentarily and it creates wear on the rifling... bout it. Your gas tube will rupture before destroying a barrel in one shooting session....
4) It's called a dust cover.... amazing how the name implies it's usage. Use dry lube in dusty enviroments and keep it clean.
5) Not accurate? Tell CMP Highpower shooters this... please.. I beg you.
6) Field stripping is a pain in the ass? The bolt consists of 7 parts, and the rifle of 3. That's 10 parts to look after. Want complicated? Dissasemble a K98 bolt.
7) You were stretching with what you had...




My opinion? Ak-47 was/is the #1 rifle on the planet, but the M16 legacy should not be overlooked as a lesser equal.

The M1 Garand is a fine rifle, but it has too many limitations in comparison to be considered the best.

Last edited by JE3146 (2006-12-05 17:36:42)

paranoid101
Ambitious but Rubbish
+540|6710
The Martini Henry rifle, won the Zulu wars

https://img209.imageshack.us/img209/3213/image012tv4.jpg
JE3146
Member
+109|6541|Oregon

Major.League.Infidel wrote:

Miller wrote:

Cougar wrote:


.....ohh God.. are you fucking serious?
Are you serious??? The M16 is a well built rifle.... Was the XM8 cancelled by the US Military??? I would like to use that when I enlist.
The .223 round of an m16 isn't big enough these days, especially in close warfare.  Personally I prefer the 6.8mm round, but that's me.  And yes the XM8 was cancelled, because it was a piece of shit.
It's plenty big enough. We just don't utilize it like we should. A MK262 MOD 1 with its 77 gr. puts a hurting on whatever it hits. Only detail is it's an expensive round in comparison to the 62 gr. M855 round we issue.

The 6.8SPC is a valid alternative, but there's no sense in rebarrelling every rifle in a servicemen's hands over it when ammo could make the difference in the same caliber.
stryyker
bad touch
+1,682|6690|California

M1 Garand, M14 (Korean War era), B.A.R, M1 Carbine, Kar 98
JE3146
Member
+109|6541|Oregon

yuckfou09 wrote:

PBAsydney wrote:

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

Bleh. StG-44 makes it sound cooler.
Mp-43 was the original prototype, Mp-44 was the standard issue version of it, Stg-44 was a nickname that Hitler himself gave it IIRC.

liquix wrote:

I would vote the ak-47. Reason being, it is extremely widespread and uses a 7.62 whereas many other semi-modern rifles use a 5.56. Another reason is its balance between: reliability, power, and cost effectiveness. If that weapon did not exist, I would choose the m1 garand
Dont underestimate low-caliber round, I'd prefer getting hit by a 7.62 kalashni round anyday before a 5.56mm NATO round, the NATO rounds fragment inside you do do maximum damage.
you realize that the 7.62x39 round the ak fires is a tumbler round right? Whch means it tumbles end over end like a football at kickoff. But you are semi correct about the .223 or 5.56 NATO round the M-16 shoot. It tends to bounce of bones and fragment.
You must be joking.....

It's a "tumbler"???

Got news for you. I own and have shot plenty of AK variants and I've yet to have a keyhole on target. (aka... a tumbling bullet)

Not to even mention the fact that AK variants around the globe fire a variety of catridges from 9x18, to 5.45x39mm, to 5.56x45mm, to 7.62x39mm, to 7.62x51 and even 7.62x54R...

Last edited by JE3146 (2006-12-05 17:55:30)

l41e
Member
+677|6618

Heckler & Koch G41A2/A3.
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6550|the dank(super) side of Oregon
Assault rifle:  FN-FAL & M14 tie.
Bolt Action:  1st-Kar98 and variants, including Springfield '03A3. 2nd-Enfield No. 4 variants.
R3v4n
We shall beat to quarters!
+433|6456|Melbourne

M1 Grand, M24 & The AUSTYER F88

i know you said no sniper rifles but i couldn't leave it out
~ Do you not know that in the service … one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?
Naughty_Om
Im Ron Burgundy?
+355|6603|USA

11sog_raider wrote:

yeah, i know the m1 was used very limited in vietnam, by the VC or south vietnamese
OMG. i just saw your sig. its disgraceful. ITS YOU ARE not forgotten. NOT YOUR. fucking tard. Change it. now.
Fenris_GreyClaw
Real Хорошо
+826|6489|Adelaide, South Australia

R3v4n wrote:

M1 Grand, M24 & The AUSTYER F88

i know you said no sniper rifles but i couldn't leave it out
why do so any people say the M1 Garand? i hate that gun.

FG-42 ftw.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard