1 posted on
10/13/2007 2:06:03 AM PDT by
csvset
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
To: csvset
sick. too bad my job will never go to .45.
2 posted on
10/13/2007 2:10:45 AM PDT by
thefactor
To: csvset
As a long time fan of the Mac-10, I just can’t see this as the Mac Killer that will replace those in the field. I also can’t see them replacing existing surplus equipment that has gone to the various departments in the US.
3 posted on
10/13/2007 2:21:05 AM PDT by
kingu
(No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
To: csvset
I saw the weapon demonstrated on Future Weapons. It seemed easier to control as they claimed.
To: csvset
"Some industry experts question whether the company will make significant inroads with military and police, which have moved away from submachine guns - in part because their pistol-caliber rounds can't pierce body armor. The gun's price tag - now expected to retail in the $1,200-to-$1,300 range - also could chill sales. " I have mixed opinions on the .223 for patrol LEO. Friendly fire on one extreme and the low recoil vs. a shotgun on the other. As for $$$ many small departments fork it over for AR type rifles. So cost would be a factor too, since shot guns are cheaper.
5 posted on
10/13/2007 2:25:50 AM PDT by
endthematrix
(He was shouting 'Allah!' but I didn't hear that. It just sounded like a lot of crap to me.)
To: csvset
Directing the recoil downward should’ve been solved years ago. An excellent weapon that KRISS.
6 posted on
10/13/2007 2:26:56 AM PDT by
Red Steel
To: csvset; Red Steel
will they be available for private purchase?
7 posted on
10/13/2007 2:28:40 AM PDT by
thefactor
To: csvset
10 posted on
10/13/2007 2:34:59 AM PDT by
Captain Beyond
(The Hammer of the gods! (Just a cool line from a Led Zep song))
To: csvset
I WANT ONE! For SoFlo palmetto bugs. Those things can fly, you know...
Very cool! Thanks.
12 posted on
10/13/2007 3:00:03 AM PDT by
Caipirabob
(Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
To: csvset
To: DaveLoneRanger
Nothing to do with the bang list or self defense.....
But an interesting piece on a new design.
17 posted on
10/13/2007 4:02:36 AM PDT by
PeteB570
(Guns, what real men want for Christmas)
To: csvset
Major question: How fast can it kill Muzzies?
18 posted on
10/13/2007 4:03:39 AM PDT by
NTHockey
(Rules of engagement #1 - Take no prisoners))
To: csvset
Sorry - if the bullet is going away from you, the recoil is 180° away - towards you.
Newton’s third law - it’s not just a suggestion - it’s the law.
This firearm has the center of the barrel in line with the shooters hand - eliminating angular forces from the equation and reducing muzzle rise. The movement of other components may change the perceived recoil but the net result is still opposite the travel of the projectile.
19 posted on
10/13/2007 4:34:08 AM PDT by
NY.SS-Bar9
(DR #1692)
To: csvset
He’s holding and firing it with one hand! It must be very light. Carbon fiber?
20 posted on
10/13/2007 4:46:25 AM PDT by
RoadTest
(The LORD shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in)
To: csvset
Interesting to see where it goes. Looks like a decent piece of engineering; the vertical recoil assembly should serve to counteract muzzle rize and dampen felt recoil.
The question is, does it really offer improved control or hit probability over the PDWs from FN and HK, and advanced SMG designs like HK's UMP. It does look sufficiently compact to offer some advantage in concealability for security personnel.
Rifle caliber carbines are the tactical du jour at the moment though, I wonder how much attention this will actually get.
22 posted on
10/13/2007 5:04:30 AM PDT by
xsrdx
(Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas)
To: csvset
Bob didn’t make it - and he wasn’t smiling...
25 posted on
10/13/2007 5:28:08 AM PDT by
azhenfud
(The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
To: csvset
New submachine gun could shake up the firearms world Actually, due to unconstitutional laws passed by our "superiors", this gun will have no effect on the firearms world. It might have some impact upon the police and military, though. We peasants can't presently own machine guns newer than 1986 legally under any circumstances.
31 posted on
10/13/2007 6:14:36 AM PDT by
coloradan
(Failing to protect the liberties of your enemies establishes precedents that will reach to yourself.)
To: Joe Brower; archy; Squantos; Eaker; CodeToad; csvset; stephenjohnbanker; Lurker; wardaddy; ...
BANG!
35 posted on
10/13/2007 7:11:03 AM PDT by
Travis McGee
(---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
To: csvset
...at a range on the Blackwater USA campus in Moyock, N.C. Blackwater! LOL! They could get into trouble with a bunch of weapons like this! (sarcasm)
36 posted on
10/13/2007 7:17:50 AM PDT by
airborne
(Proud to be a conservative! Proud to support Duncan Hunter for President!)
To: csvset; Brucifer
43 posted on
10/13/2007 9:03:24 AM PDT by
Liberty Valance
(Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
To: csvset
I would like to see this technology incorporated into a relatively lightweight 38 cal. pistol. I can’t find one that my wife and daughter can handle.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson