Posted on 07/05/2002 2:24:39 PM PDT by 45Auto
Amen. My will never be sold or taken either. It doesn't need a flip up dust cover and shoots clean or dirty. It will make three shots touching at 100 yards, and doesn't need windage correction at 400 yards. All this with el-cheapo import or surplus ammo. Of course it is too heavy to be carried by the "New" army.
Awesome weapon. I had about three days of range time to burn a lot of ammo through one of those while I was attending a "school" behind the fence at Aberdeen Md. I liked it, accurate and hits were solid and easy.
Stay Safe !
I hate to break the news to you but I saw a .308 used on a playing card that was fixed edgewise and the .308 was deflected. Years later I saw a video called, "Dangerous Weapons,"[I think]. The guy set up one inch branches to prove that a .223 is deflected by them. He had a big grin when that proved correct. Then he set up a .308. Same results. The .308 was deflected by the branches. He didn't look that happy after that.
I have a video that may be the one you are referring to - I think it is called "Deadly Weapons". Not only did the 5.56 NATO (.223) and 7.62 NATO (.308) bullets tumble after hitting brush/tree branches, but so too did the .50 BMG caliber heavy rifle they tested on it. If a .50 bullet will tumble, then any small arm caliber bullet will tumble when it strikes a leaf, branch, or other interference. The "inferiority" of the smaller calibers in regards to tumbling, is a myth.
Well the enemy had Chicom ammo and the karens were collecting it en masse so they used a finishing reamer on a 1/4 in socket extention and a dummy round as a go-no go gauge. A little bastard file work and they had a great rig.
Down side is that if your a reloader you'll need to set the barrel back just a bit as the cases fire forms the last few thousandths of the brass shoulder . Karens and Christians in Action evidently didn't care.
CUPS are same as .303 ammo, better accuracy and surplus 7.62x54R is or has been found as low as 80 bucks per thousand round cans.
http://www.jpfo.org/smle.htm
Stay Safe !
Stay Safe , Vote, Cache & Carry !
I don't think the British or the French ever built a weapon that was worth a hoot. Now the the Germans were another story!
So you have already forgotten about the French 75mm gun, the first rapid fire artillery piece with a reliable recoil mechanism? Some French small arms have been atrocious, but no worse then Italian or Japanese small arms from the same period. British small arms have been superb, especially the SMLE series of rifles; reliable and smooth bold action rifles, marred only by their use of rimmed ammunition (which jams easily if not loaded carefully into the magazine).
I'm assuming you actually believe this, but you couldn't be more wrong. The British Lee Enfield rifles were far superior combat rifles than any Mauser.
So it was just superior marketing that led most of the world to adopt Mausers? I think not. The SMLE's have a very smooth bolt action, but the bolt is not all that strong, and not as inherently accurate, as the Mauser bolt, and the SMLE is further marred by use of rimmed ammunition, which jams easily if not loaded into the magazine properly. The Mauser bolt is very strong and reliable; not as quick as the SMLE bolt, perhaps. But no one ever died because their Mauser jammed or because they could not work the bolt fast enough. Assuming the soldier is taking aim, the Mauser bolt is fast enough, and it is more accurate then the SMLE.
How about going back to the best rifle - along with the Springfield M1 Garand - in the history of the U.S. Military: The Browning BAR in .30-06?
You are comparing apples to oranges. The M1 was an infantry rifle; the BAR was a light machine gun (or, at least, it was supposed to be). In actuality, the BAR is too heavy to be an infantry rifle, and not heavy enough to be a true light machine gun. The BAR lacks quick change barrels, so it is limited to very short bursts, due to barrel overheating. Also the 20 round magazine is too small, and its location under the gun is poorly located for quick magazine changes. If you want to see a proper light machine gun, you should look at the British BREN gun, and the Czech gun from which it was derived. There's nothing impressive about the BAR as a military weapon, though with its barrel shortened, it did make a superb gangster weapon in the 1920's.
I think the French came up with the Famas rifle that much like the Brittish bull pup is very unreliable. If you want to lose wars give your troops crummy weapons, maybe thats why they are giving the afgans the Brits pup LOL.
I take these stories about "unreliability" with a huge grain of salt. Mostly these stories are either referring to minor teething troubles, or are motivated by some kind of intraservice politics, as happened with the original AR-15/M-16. Also a lot of people posting here have huge axes to grind, and/or nostalgia for the weapons they used decades ago when they were in the service, which therefore disposes them to consider any subsequent weapons adopted to replace these to be crap, regardless of the evidence. Nostalgia and muleheadedness will overwhelm all contrary information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.