Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on May 24, 2006 20:02:02 GMT -5
in your opinion, what is the best gun of all time, why?
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on May 24, 2006 20:02:59 GMT -5
i think its the m14, big round, high range and accuarcy, big power and very reliable, so much better than the 16
|
|
|
Post by Colonel on Jul 3, 2006 18:17:08 GMT -5
for long range, sure. but for up close dirty work, the m16/m4 has the advantage as far as weight, ammunition capacity (1 person can carry more .223 than .308s) less recoil.
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on Jul 5, 2006 13:25:03 GMT -5
5.56 is a small fast round. goes right threw them with little damage. totally inappropriate for cqb. the m14 can be shortened. with its larger round it takes 1 shot to cripple or even kill the enemy. true it is heavyir but is sooooo much more reliable, powerful, accurate and deadly. making it the best gun of all time.
|
|
|
Post by angelofdeath 215 on Jul 5, 2006 19:05:32 GMT -5
well im not sure you can have one gun as the "best" gun of all time. because they are all made for different things.... rifle- m14 like curt said support- mg42 because every country since ww2 has tried to copy it (and failed by the way) handgun- 1911 series because its extremely reliable and has great stopping power... and has been in production since ww1 so it must be an ok gun
|
|
|
Post by Colonel on Jul 5, 2006 19:15:38 GMT -5
rifle cartridges + short barrel + long powder burn time = less effectiveness than a 5.56 at terminal range and with less control
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on Jul 6, 2006 15:56:57 GMT -5
as far as support goes. i think that they saw is better, more reliable, its own design, and the best rof out there. the mg42 was notorious for over heating rediculously quick. the m1919a1 was a better support weapon ofr its time but it 2 was replaced by the saw. and by the way the m14 would beat anyother weapon becuase it could quite simply "pick the operator off" from a distance or take him down with a single shot tot he chest. there is no conventional small arm that could not be eliminated by a decent soldier with an m14
|
|
|
Post by Colonel on Jul 7, 2006 16:00:03 GMT -5
then the AK came along and killed everyone who was using M14s at the time.
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on Jul 14, 2006 20:08:50 GMT -5
only cause there were thousands more. wasn't a better weapon there was just ten times more firepower between all of charlie"s ak's that the m14 was overwhelmed. but they still killed everyone they could
|
|
|
Post by thecolonel on Jul 15, 2006 18:24:33 GMT -5
proof positive that larger numbers of more agile smaller arms can overwhelm a force with more powerful arms, hence the widespread use of such rounds as the 7.62x39, .223, and 4.6mm
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on Jul 15, 2006 22:27:08 GMT -5
proof positive that larger numbers of more agile smaller arms can overwhelm a force with more powerful arms, hence the widespread use of such rounds as the 7.62x39, .223, and 4.6mm m14 was 7.62 the 16 is used by us and canada and where the fuck hhave u seen a 4.6mm round?
|
|
|
Post by dsbond on Jul 16, 2006 10:59:52 GMT -5
MP7, H&K UCP, and not yet in production ... Brugger & Thomet MP-9
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on Jul 16, 2006 14:43:51 GMT -5
ok yeah but i meant what mainstream weapon have u seen that fires 4.6. mp7 is only used by spec. ops as far as i no, its not a very common weapon and i never heard of the others.
|
|
|
Post by Colonel on Jul 20, 2006 22:31:45 GMT -5
just because you haven't heard of something doesn't mean it hasn't killed children like you in shithole thirdworld villages in the middle of nofuckwhere.
|
|
Doc
Specialist
Posts: 549
|
Post by Doc on Jul 20, 2006 22:38:05 GMT -5
yeah but that was done by an elite team of "operators" making it irrelevant
|
|