It's good to know that I'm not the only "Armchair Warrior" in here, then. };^{)~
The '03 is a good weapon. I personally would prefer one to an M-16, especially if I had a decent pistol, by which I mean one with adequate reliability, adequate power, able to penetrate normal body armor, and accurate to about one and a half inches at fifty feet.
...That would probly be the CZ-52 in 7.62 X 25MM Tokarev or the old reliable Russian TT-33 Tokarev.
The old .30 Tokarev, as it is sometimes called, is one of the most underapreciated handgun rounds ever developed for military sidearms and subguns.
Putting an 85 grain bullet out at around 1,600 FPS for over 500# of ME, it makes the 9MM para pale by comparison.
It is reputedly the most powerful sidearm cartridge ever developed and commonly issued for military use.
With the round-nose FMJ bullet, it has never had the reputation as a "manstopper" that the venerable old Browning .45 ACP has, and tends to "overpenetrate" - although I have heard from those who regularly ring a 10" steel gong at 300 yards with the CZ-52, and I call mine my "Pocket Carbine".
With a properly handloaded JHP the potential of the .30 TOK really starts to come to light, and I think that as more Shooters Re-discover this little bobcat of a pistol round, it will enjoy a revival of popularity.
A contributor to one of the gunboards discussing the CZ-52 related as to how he hung an old kevlar vest over the door of a junk car and popped it with his CZ; not only did the 7.62mm dust through both sides of the vest, it did the same with the automobile he was using as a "backstop".
Another reported that his CZ-52 had shattered the engine block of another junker - and on the basis of my observations & experience, I don't think either one of them are pulling our legs.
We've heard from more than one GLOCK owner who admits that the CZ-52 is at least as accurate and reliable as their Glock, albeit somewhat heavier - and a few opine that the Czech-O-Matic is even superior to the Glock in both departments.
And that at less than a third of the price!
The .30 Tok is perhaps more powerful than anything the Glock comes chambered in currently, AFAIK.
If you have an FFL, you can currently get into a VG or EXc. condition milsurp CZ-52 for under $100, complete with a spare magazine, lanyard, and real leather Czech Army flap holster - but plan on spending another $20 or so for the recoil spring upgrade, and you may want to invest another $45 or so for the firing pin upgrade as well.
But even at that they are one heckovva pistol for the price!
If I had my druthers, I would go for something about the power, cyclic rate, weight, and controllability of the old BAR.
I think that an outfit known as ROBARMS has beat you to it;
Check out the M-96 system @:
http://www.robarm.com/
This is a very interesting development, and seems to be catching on in popularity.
Most people are not riflemen nor light machine gunners, however.
With the possible exception of the Marines, you are, IMHO at least. correct.
As far as carbine (which the M-16 is) ammunition I think it hard to beat 30-30 performance, though maybe 7mm.
It's kind of hard to ballistically compare the 5.56mm with the .30-30; what the .30 does to some extent with inertia, the 5.56 does with velocity. It seems that the 7.62 X 39MM or ".30AK" as I call it is more on a par with the old .30-30 in terms of effective range, accuracy, and downrange capability.
A decent grenade launcher system is necessary these days."
76 posted on 12/28/2003 4:20:18 AM EST by Iris7
Granted; I remember the M-79 as well, BTW; weren't they fun?
My "dream" system would use a gas redirection system not unlike the M-14 or Yugo SKS 59/66 - but instead of just 2 positions (gas 'on' for auto-fire or 'off' for grenade launching) there would be a third selection which would re-direct the gas directly into the coaxial launching system, which would be about the caliber of a 10-guage shotgun.
Special "launching" blanks would not be required, and the projectile could be launched with a regular live ball round or in the case of training, with a regular blank with blank-firing device installed on the weapon.
Hand-grenade launching adaptors similar to what was used on the Garand in WW-II could be inserted through the muzzle and "snap" into position until fired, while "alternative" projectiles or bundled "packages" could be breech-loaded, and might include nonleathal riot-control or prisoner guarding rounds, "lock-breakers" for building insertion, CS gas, illuminating flares, Line-Throwing sabotts for Naval or rescue use, grappeling hooks, or sabotted paintballs for that extra touch of realism in training!(Ouch!)
A seperate, secondary firing system or seperate integral grenade "rounds' would not be required, you see.
You've got your grenades to pitch or to launch, or to drop down the spider-hole, depending on the tactical situation at hand.
