My latest acquisition
M1 Garand, .30-06
M1 Garand, .30-06
auuughhghgh *comes in pants*
down-sights shot pl0x.
down-sights shot pl0x.
Put a Reflex sight on it!!! or an M320mcgid1 wrote:
My latest acquisition
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/8183/IMG_0238.JPG
M1 Garand, .30-06
I just discovered that you can get a permit for range shooting with these lovely WWII rifles here in Denmark... Garand and other semi-auto's have to be modified to only fire two shots per clip to be legal tho'mcgid1 wrote:
My latest acquisition
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/8183/IMG_0238.JPG
M1 Garand, .30-06
*bang*
*bang*
*TWANGGG*
blasphemyGR34 wrote:
Put a Reflex sight on it!!! or an M320mcgid1 wrote:
My latest acquisition
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/8183/IMG_0238.JPG
M1 Garand, .30-06
Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-03-06 13:27:37)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
lol eurolaws
nvm.... calif isnt that much better
nvm.... calif isnt that much better
Last edited by SealXo (2010-03-06 14:00:15)
what do you mean? in california i managed to acquire a remington 38 pump, a 9mm, a 45 and a .308.SealXo wrote:
lol eurolaws
nvm.... calif isnt that much better
lol anyone who can't find a gun in the states . . .
My second newest addition to my collection. Anyone know what it is?
Meh sights look like an enfieldCaptainMike wrote:
http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/ii35 … CN3403.jpg
My second newest addition to my collection. Anyone know what it is?
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Not quite...FloppY_ wrote:
Meh sights look like an enfieldCaptainMike wrote:
http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/ii35 … CN3403.jpg
My second newest addition to my collection. Anyone know what it is?
M1917
i was going to say a P14 but it's not
i was going to say a P14 but it's not
Well done! +1krazed wrote:
M1917
i was going to say a P14 but it's not
It's nearly all matching, barrel is Dec 1917 and the receiver is Feb 1918.
Cause you asked:Finray wrote:
auuughhghgh *comes in pants*
down-sights shot pl0x.
I know that was sarcasm (or at least I hope it was) but still,GR34 wrote:
Put a Reflex sight on it!!! or an M320mcgid1 wrote:
My latest acquisition
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/8183/IMG_0238.JPG
M1 Garand, .30-06
Actually, yes. The M1917 is called the "Enfield." It is not the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield that most people associate with the name. That one was very much a British rifle.CaptainMike wrote:
Not quite...FloppY_ wrote:
Meh sights look like an enfieldCaptainMike wrote:
http://i548.photobucket.com/albums/ii35 … CN3403.jpg
My second newest addition to my collection. Anyone know what it is?
Thanks for the pic mcgid
The area visible through the first sight looks really small.. not at all like any game I have seen it in, for example
The area visible through the first sight looks really small.. not at all like any game I have seen it in, for example
Gameplay > RealismFinray wrote:
Thanks for the pic mcgid
The area visible through the first sight looks really small.. not at all like any game I have seen it in, for example
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hO7EANI8mJs/0.jpg
Tweaks must be made.. tbh..
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
thats because gamers would bitch that your field of view is blocked and it needs to be changedFinray wrote:
Thanks for the pic mcgid
The area visible through the first sight looks really small.. not at all like any game I have seen it in, for example
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hO7EANI8mJs/0.jpg
Go play Resistance and Liberation.krazed wrote:
thats because gamers would bitch that your field of view is blocked and it needs to be changedFinray wrote:
Thanks for the pic mcgid
The area visible through the first sight looks really small.. not at all like any game I have seen it in, for example
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hO7EANI8mJs/0.jpg
lol
The human eye also produces a slightly different effect.
The sights are fine, if you use them, rather than take pictures of them.
The sights are fine, if you use them, rather than take pictures of them.
The sights are quite good tbh. The sights they use in games would be almost impossible to use as accurately in RL because you would have a much more difficult time guestimating the center of the ring. As mentioned before, the reason for the game sights is that most gamers prefer field of view to realism.
It also depends on how far your eye is from the rear sight. Move your head further back, and you get a smaller field of view.
True. When I took that picture, the camera was much closer to the rear sight than where my eye normally is when I shoot. My normal sight picture has the tips of the tongs on either side just touching the inner edge of the rear sight.RAIMIUS wrote:
It also depends on how far your eye is from the rear sight. Move your head further back, and you get a smaller field of view.
Last edited by mcgid1 (2010-03-09 11:46:09)
ok after reading this I must take my M1 out. gets so damn expensive to shoot though have to bring some .22's for cheap fun too
CMP?mcgid1 wrote:
My latest acquisition
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/8183/IMG_0238.JPG
M1 Garand, .30-06
Oh and yeah, real iron sights block your FOV so much. Especially them damn peep sights.
Used gun from a gun shop. Oddly enough I can't seem to find a way to get into the CMP in my area, they're all high school JROTC's.fermatx wrote:
CMP?mcgid1 wrote:
My latest acquisition
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/8183/IMG_0238.JPG
M1 Garand, .30-06
Oh and yeah, real iron sights block your FOV so much. Especially them damn peep sights.
On a side note, I learned that just because someone has cleaned the cosmolin off the outside of the gun does not necessarily mean that they have cleaned it from the inside of the gun. I figured that since I didn't see any on the outside it was safe to shoot as is, and I was wrong. Worked great the first time, mostly cause the stuff simply was melting then. The second time, the entire trigger group jammed up solid on the fifth shot, cause the cosmolin turned to tar after the first session. Fortunately the shop I bought it from is fixing it, but it's still kind of embarrassing that I missed such an obvious step.
Last edited by mcgid1 (2010-03-09 22:28:39)
Hey, we made a similar mistake with one of the 91/30s. So is that Garand a Springfield?
Make X-meds a full member, for the sake of 15 year old anal gangbang porn watchers everywhere!