1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.


  2. Click here to enter the drawing for your chance to win a Ka-Bar Becker BK5 Magnum Camp , Bladeforums.com swag or memberships!
    Be sure to read the rules before entering, then help us decide next week's giveaway by hitting the poll in that thread! Entries close at midnight, Saturday July 27!

    Once the entries close, we'll live stream the drawing on Sunday, July 28 at 5PM Eastern. Tune in to our YouTube channel TheRealBladeForums for a chance to win bonus prizes!

    Questions? Comments? Post in the discussion thread here

Americas New Military Rifle Kicks Ass.

Discussion in 'Himalayan Imports' started by DannyinJapan, Aug 24, 2004.

  1. Spectre

    Spectre

    Nov 3, 1998
    I recently purchased my second FAL, an especially heavy one with a 24" match
    barrel and weighted buttstock.

    Any FAL is pitifully light compared to carrying a cannon on said marches, so I feel fine with my choices. :)

    John
     
  2. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    Brantoken, caseless ammo has not worked out. The residual left soon clogs the chamber and gun. That is why it burst upon the scene and quietly faded away.

    I am very happy and curious to see what men come up with next. I hope there is some technilogicai breakthrough. "Smart bullets" would be nice, and I don't mean 20 mm special purpost rounds.

    We've got to remember to keep it simple, and always have mechanical back up if possible. You can't fly a modern military jet without the computer, but you should always be able to fire a handheld weapon. We all see it coming- the day we are too reliant upon technology and our weapons systems fail because someone thought of a cheap jamming device.



    munk
     
  3. sodak

    sodak

    Mar 26, 2004
    I went through basic training (about 250 years ago, it seems like) with an M-1 Carbine. Still miss that rifle...
     
  4. brantoken

    brantoken

    303
    Feb 6, 2004
    yeah , I know it hasn't worked out yet, but I think
    that when it does , it will drive the next big revolution.

    It will in good time, It is the most logical direction for reasons
    stated previously.

    I don't think it will be completely caseless( we know that doesn't work), semi caseless or much reduced case will be the way to go. Either way it gives the round less bulk ,shaves weight, which mean more basic load and higher
    mag capacity.

    a new propellent will be the key( it should address the fouling problem as well), and in a world with high explosives like c4 and rdx, and solid rocket fuel.
    seems kind of odd that that hasn't been addressed. Basicallly there hasn't been too much change in smokeless powder for many many years.....It's pretty much the same chemical composition, in different shapes( been a while since I have looked at it, I admit). I just think that nobody is looking in that direction.

    It does make sense in another way too, a faster propellent will get
    the projectile up to speed faster, which may allow for shorter barrels, and even a greater weight saving in the weapon.

    let see if I had about 10 million, a really nice cnc machine shop, a chemical engineer( not to menetion support staff), cycrogenic capibities ,a good heat treat oven, not to mention a few years to play.

    Anybody willing to contribute to the " next generation'?

    Oh, well..... Anybody got close ties with "Uncle George".... doesn't hurt to
    ask....
     
  5. Spectre

    Spectre

    Nov 3, 1998
    Smart bullets will never substitute for a smart soldier.

    John
     
  6. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    No, they wont.

    And when I saw the electronic aperatus they wanted the 'future soldier' to wear, I groaned. I've never been in the military. But it seemed to me if anything went wrong, you were duck soup. Also, if anyone jumped out in front of you and you had to move- you were duck soup.


    munk
     
  7. brantoken

    brantoken

    303
    Feb 6, 2004
    They have chemical lasers , why not?
     
  8. Kismet

    Kismet

    Jan 30, 2002
    OT, sorta...

    anybody know how much weapons training time is in basic these days? What do they set as a standard for qualification/pass?


    Kis
     
  9. DannyinJapan

    DannyinJapan

    Oct 9, 2003
    I think it's 25 out of 40 targets.
     
  10. Ferrous Wheel

    Ferrous Wheel

    May 16, 2002
    how much does a FN FAL run fer, normally?

    Turns out congress (and just about anyone who isn't a gun-control advocate) has turned a deaf ear to the gun control nuts. Neither candidate for presidency is gonna touch it, so it is as good as dead. Bout damn time.

    In 3 Weeks, shelves will be stocked, prices will drop, and you'll roll into yer gun show or shop and roll out with a hi-qual semi-auto, heat shielded, folding stocked, bayonet-lugged, flash suppressed, detachable hi capacity mag fed, LEGAL rifle, without let or hindrance. It'll be Yule in September!!!


    Don't worry, Danny. we'll save some til yer stateside...oh, that'll be December, eh?

    Keith
     
  11. DannyinJapan

    DannyinJapan

    Oct 9, 2003
    Hey, thats no joke. I may be asking you guys for help with that stuff.
    I will be looking for:

    Hi capacity magazines for Beretta Cougar 8040F in blued or stainless
    Telescoping stock/Magazines/scope mount/accessories for my CETME
     
  12. 45-70

    45-70

    Jul 10, 2003
    Nope, I just want flash suppressors on some of my rifles. I have a homebuilt scout that likely doesn't need one, but I have sevearl others that just don't look right. I really want sidefolding stocks on my AK's.
     
  13. gravertom

    gravertom

    Jun 4, 2004
    18 years ago, you had to get 26 out of 40 to qualify in the Army.
    That was shooting pop up targets from 50 to 300 meters.

    My best was 36. That was with an M16A1 at Ft carson . I think my best in basic at Ft Benning was 34.

    I always felt that we, as infantrymen, got way too little marksmanship training/practice. We had the same boring NBC classes over and over again, and not nearly enough squad drills, etc. had some good land nav instruction, and some of the field exercises were good, esp. at the NTC at Ft. Irwin. I had two really outstanding squad leaders while I was at Ft carson, and one excellent platoon Sgt too.

    I did carry the M60 for a while, since I was one of two short guys in my platoon. We got the M249 right before I got out(88). Thought that was a sweet weapon, and 15 pounds seemed like a dream after the 60. Got to use it on one live fire exercise before my time ran out. I noticed it tended to jump to the right when fired, so i would hit the dirt with the weapon slightly to the left of a bunker, and then squeeze off a burst still holding with just the right hand, and it would sweep right across the bunker under recoil. The 250 round drum semeed to work well too. Would like to see that gun in 6.8mm

    Sorry for the rambling!

    Tom
     
  14. gravertom

    gravertom

    Jun 4, 2004
    hey Danny, how do you like the CETME?

    Tom
     
  15. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    It's lighter than the FN



    but I'm not Danny. Just thought I'd call from the back row


    munk
     
  16. DannyinJapan

    DannyinJapan

    Oct 9, 2003
    Its basically a spanish-made HK G3.
    (The parts are 90% interchangable.)
    I think the quality is a little better, there is more steel in the receiver, but other than that, they are the same.
    I am a big guy, as you know, so 9.7 pounds is not a big number for me to carry.
    I just like it, it has character...

    Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, the magazines are made with more metal, they are built stronger and with more precision and quality.
    The engineers actually thought about the fact that the magazine is an important part of a firearm that needed to work as well as the rest of the weapon.
    Look how thick the feedlips are compared to M16 mags..
    [​IMG]
     
  17. Spectre

    Spectre

    Nov 3, 1998
    Keith,

    The cheapest FAL you'll find will probably be a Century. Most of these evidently work ok, many have problems that are relatively minor, and a few are lemons. Two weeks ago, I saw one- that had some of the parts replaced for higher quality pieces, sold by the friend of a friend. He wanted $400, but it went for $300. I would've jumped on it for $350 QUICKLY if I'd had the funds. Finding one in the $450 range should be no trouble, all day long. If you get something like a DSA, you can pay from $800 or so (for a used parts kits build, built by DSA) to $1800 or so (all new receiver and parts, and a rifle that has been called The Best FAL Ever, or somesuch, with various cool options).

    I'm pretty sure one now has to shoot 23/40 to qualify. My best score ever was 38, fired on the range the Rangers use, while at Benning.

    They actually spend a pretty good amount of time in Basic training up rifle, at least for infantrymen, now.

    Interesting note: Germany wanted to use the FAL/LAR/STG-58 (they called it the G1), but wasn't able to get the license from FN to make them in Germany. Since the CETME was the rifle the G3 was based on, it would be more accurate to describe the G3 as a German-made CETME! :D

    John
     
  18. DannyinJapan

    DannyinJapan

    Oct 9, 2003
    i didnt know that...
     
  19. Spectre

    Spectre

    Nov 3, 1998
    Yeah, well- I'm a gun geek in recovery...what I call a "riot nerd". :D

    John, grew tired of black guns while in the Army
     
  20. Spectre

    Spectre

    Nov 3, 1998
    Oh, Danny- you might want to look into the Kel-Tec SU-16. I haven't had the chance to fire one yet, but the one I handled a couple of weeks ago felt pretty good (buttstock's too long, but I hear one can get a shorter stock). Further, KT's got a good reputation for customer care...and by the time you get back, you should be able to buy one for $500 or less. :)
     

Share This Page