Talk about the Second amendment!

[LaRocha]

What you guys want sniper rifles for? You gonna sit on an overpass and shoot people at the gas station?

 

[Bobby_3111]

I saw a demonstration of a light machine gun on the discovery channel or the history channel were the fired a 200 round belt without stopping and the guy picked the gun up by the barrel without burning himself.

They say they only have to change barrels due to wear every 15,000 rounds I believe. And it was as accurate after that 200 round belt as the first shot. Can't remember it designation.

I gotta call bullshit on that one, unless they were using some new experimental cooling barrels or something there is no way you can pick up a gun by the barrel after firing that many rounds that fast.

Hell I melted a synthetic strap on an m249 when i fired half a 100-round belt at 6 to 9 round bursts (a little too fast, only waited half a second between bursts) at a target before.

But firing 200 rounds without stopping and picking the weapon up by the barrel ? No way in hell.

 

[stephen55]

An overpass.....no....

What you guys want sniper rifles for? You gonna sit on an overpass and shoot people at the gas station?

I suppose you could say that a sniper rifle is a rifle used by a sniper. In that line of work, accuracy counts, unlike horse shoes and hand grenades.

I'm not a sniper. That said, back in my target shooting days I was damned good. I still have a 200 yard target with five ragged holes in a one half inch circle to prove it. To the initiated, that's quarter minute accuracy and any military sniper would be impressed.

On a hunting trip up into the Rockies in northern British Columbia, about two decades ago, I saw the Grand Daddy of all bull moose. This thing had two sheets of plywood for a rack. It was easily 1600 pounds. It was genuine Boone and Crockett material. It was also standing in the middle of a high Alpine meadow that was the size of Manhattan island. Okay, not quite that big but there was no way I could get within 1000 yards without the moose making me.

Now...if I had brought along a handy-dandy McMillan TAC-50....good out to 2600 yards...

And now for something completely different. Really big moose are good for more than simply admiring from a distance....

http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_mar2007/LoggingMoose.jpg

 

[stephen55]

I saw a demonstration of a light machine gun on the discovery channel or the history channel were the fired a 200 round belt without stopping and the guy picked the gun up by the barrel without burning himself.

I'm also going to call that one.

Take your every day bolt action hunting rifle to the range. Fire three rounds spaced by, say, thirty seconds. The barrel will be warm. Now fire three more rounds quickly. The barrel will be very warm.

Fire 200 rounds through a light machine gun in one go and pick it up by the barrel? I don't know what part of the gun the guy was using to pick it up but it sure as hell wasn't the barrel. A barrel sleeve...maybe.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I gotta call bullshit on that one, unless they were using some new experimental cooling barrels or something there is no way you can pick up a gun by the barrel after firing that many rounds that fast.

Hell I melted a synthetic strap on an m249 when i fired half a 100-round belt at 6 to 9 round bursts (a little too fast, only waited half a second between bursts) at a target before.

But firing 200 rounds without stopping and picking the weapon up by the barrel ? No way in hell.

It might be bullshit but they did fire 200 rounds through the thing and grabbed the barrel. I think it fired from the open bolt position and was recoil operated instead of gas blow back. So the receiver and barrel stayed cool.

 

[Bobby_3111]

It might be bullshit but they did fire 200 rounds through the thing and grabbed the barrel. I think it fired from the open bolt position and was recoil operated instead of gas blow back. So the receiver and barrel stayed cool.

Do a little experiment for me. Go outside and rub 2 sticks together as fast as you can and after 1 minute put your finger to the spots they rubbed against. That small amount of heat is nowhere near as hot as 2 peices of metal rubbing against each other constantly for the few seconds it took to fire 200 rounds.

What show was it? I'll take a look at it and see what they were using.

 

[JackLuis]

It is no problem to get a gun as hot as hell. 10-20 rnds usually does it.

Warming up that blond might take a little longer, but swabbing her bore would be a lot more fun!

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Do a little experiment for me. Go outside and rub 2 sticks together as fast as you can and after 1 minute put your finger to the spots they rubbed against. That small amount of heat is nowhere near as hot as 2 peices of metal rubbing against each other constantly for the few seconds it took to fire 200 rounds.

What show was it? I'll take a look at it and see what they were using.

Yo, bobby, I know all that...I was just relating what I saw on the tv program. Geez, get a life. Better yet I think you might need to go see that blond. Or rub your stick a little, but not too hard it might melt.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

What you guys want sniper rifles for? You gonna sit on an overpass and shoot people at the gas station?

No, but if you want to demoralize an opposing force, use snipers. If you want your retreat covered, use snipers. If you want silent, stealth and accuracy, use snipers.

And besides an overpass is too exposed.

 

[Bobby_3111]

Yo, bobby, I know all that...I was just relating what I saw on the tv program. Geez, get a life. Better yet I think you might need to go see that blond. Or rub your stick a little, but not too hard it might melt.

Well if you know all that why are you getting so defensive? Is it really that hard for you to admit you were wrong? Or are you lying flat out?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Well if you know all that why are you getting so defensive? Is it really that hard for you to admit you were wrong? Or are you lying flat out?

And how do you get that I'm lying? Do you know that what I believe or have seen isn't true? Do you have proof to the contrary? Do you know that no such weapon exists? Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Have you found somewhere on the internet that refutes what I said?

Do you know someone in the arms industry who can prove what I said is a lie?

Get your head out of your ass...I said I saw it on one of the discovery channels, I am relating from memory, how does that make me a liar?

You sure a quick to call someone who doesn't agree with you names. Skin a little thin there bobby?

 

[Katyusha]

You people who want the sniper rifles are nuts. I like my 30.06 just fine thankyouverymuch.

 

[cloudy]

You people who want the sniper rifles are nuts. I like my 30.06 just fine thankyouverymuch.

Yep, me too.

 

[Bobby_3111]

And how do you get that I'm lying? Do you know that what I believe or have seen isn't true? Do you have proof to the contrary? Do you know that no such weapon exists? Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Have you found somewhere on the internet that refutes what I said?

Do you know someone in the arms industry who can prove what I said is a lie?

Get your head out of your ass...I said I saw it on one of the discovery channels, I am relating from memory, how does that make me a liar?

You sure a quick to call someone who doesn't agree with you names. Skin a little thin there bobby?

You decide to say you saw someone once do this or that on a TV show a long time ago. You cant remember what the show was but you saw them do something that is almost impossible to do (especially a long time ago). Now you are backed into a corner because someone says it's not possible. And yet you refuse to admit you are wrong. Is that about right ?

And petty insults? You actually think i'm going to be baited like that and start name calling? How old are you again?

 

[cloudy]

You decide to say you saw someone once do this or that on a TV show a long time ago. You cant remember what the show was but you saw them do something that is almost impossible to do (especially a long time ago). Now you are backed into a corner because someone says it's not possible. And yet you refuse to admit you are wrong. Is that about right ?

And petty insults? You actually think i'm going to be baited like that and start name calling? How old are you again?

He says everyone calls him names, even when they don't.

 

[SeaCat]

I saw a demonstration of a light machine gun on the discovery channel or the history channel were the fired a 200 round belt without stopping and the guy picked the gun up by the barrel without burning himself.

They say they only have to change barrels due to wear every 15,000 rounds I believe. And it was as accurate after that 200 round belt as the first shot. Can't remember it designation.

I remember the show you are talking about.

It was a design that is to replace the M-16/M-4 rifle. Instead of using a gas return directly to the bold face as the M-16 does it uses a Piston to impart the recoil to the bolt. This allows the bolt and receiver to remain much cooler.

(The test they showed was two large capacity magazines fired quickly through the weapon then they removed the bold and held in a bare hand.)

The reduction of wear on the barrel was due to how it was lined. (No I don't remember the breakthrough they were talking about.)

I'm trying to find the program both on TouTube and the Discovery Channel Website but am not having much success.

As for longer range rifles I prefer the Ruger M77 in 30-06 or the old venerable Mauser "8mm". (K98) Once you get used to their ballistics they are quite accurate and very reliable.

Mid Range Rifles I'm partial to the Winchester 30-30 followed by the Ruger Ranch Rifles. (Both Mini30 and Mini14.) Reasonably accurate, reasonable take down power for mid sized game including deer and quite reliable with minimum care. (I have hunted with all of these rifles even though I don't own any of them at present.)

Cat

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Yep, me too.

I must be the only shooter in America that has never owned an ought-six. Why, I cannot say. I admire the cartridge greatly but seem to own either smaller or larger--sometimes much larger. Perhaps I can blame my profession. I never got to go hunting like normal persons because when y'all are out pounding the autumn back country, I'm at work. So I have had to do all my hunting close by or either in Africa or the Arctic. Close to SoCal the game isn't large enough to justify a Springfield and "when in elephant country, carry an elephant rifle". Same thing applies to the uncivilized cousins up North. Great rifle. Maybe someday I'll get one just because . . .

 

[Bobby_3111]

I remember the show you are talking about.

It was a design that is to replace the M-16/M-4 rifle. Instead of using a gas return directly to the bold face as the M-16 does it uses a Piston to impart the recoil to the bolt. This allows the bolt and receiver to remain much cooler.

(The test they showed was two large capacity magazines fired quickly through the weapon then they removed the bold and held in a bare hand.)

The reduction of wear on the barrel was due to how it was lined. (No I don't remember the breakthrough they were talking about.)

I'm trying to find the program both on TouTube and the Discovery Channel Website but am not having much success.

As for longer range rifles I prefer the Ruger M77 in 30-06 or the old venerable Mauser "8mm". (K98) Once you get used to their ballistics they are quite accurate and very reliable.

Mid Range Rifles I'm partial to the Winchester 30-30 followed by the Ruger Ranch Rifles. (Both Mini30 and Mini14.) Reasonably accurate, reasonable take down power for mid sized game including deer and quite reliable with minimum care. (I have hunted with all of these rifles even though I don't own any of them at present.)

Cat

Now that sounds more reasonable, but Zeb was talking about a belted machine gun, not an m-16, 2 very different weapons and 2 very different rates of fire.

 

[SeaCat]

As for the video. Eye Candy for some I suppose. I wouldn't want her near me on the range though.

Now put a nice redhead up there with smaller frontal protrusions, a knowledge of firearms safety and possibly the ability to hit her target and I might get interested. (Hey I just described my wife.)

Cat

 

[JackLuis]

Carnation man shoots intruder

"A man in his 70s shot and wounded an intruder who broke into the man's rural home outside Carnation early Wednesday, according to the King County Sheriff's Office."

More food for thought.

"The Weakness of Taliban Marksmanship"

They obviously fuck better than fire.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

You people who want the sniper rifles are nuts. I like my 30.06 just fine thankyouverymuch.

That is a sniper rifle, one of the first sniper rifles. The Springfield 06. And I would put up a sniper rifle against any other rifle no matter the rate of fire. The sniper will always win in a one on one. Even a two on one. And depending on the man a three on one.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

You decide to say you saw someone once do this or that on a TV show a long time ago. You cant remember what the show was but you saw them do something that is almost impossible to do (especially a long time ago). Now you are backed into a corner because someone says it's not possible. And yet you refuse to admit you are wrong. Is that about right ?

And petty insults? You actually think i'm going to be baited like that and start name calling? How old are you again?

and you better go re-read my original post...nowhere in it do I say the words "a long time ago". In fact I never mentioned a time or how long ago it was.

Now how about you admitting who's really wrong.

I remember the show you are talking about.

It was a design that is to replace the M-16/M-4 rifle. Instead of using a gas return directly to the bold face as the M-16 does it uses a Piston to impart the recoil to the bolt. This allows the bolt and receiver to remain much cooler.

(The test they showed was two large capacity magazines fired quickly through the weapon then they removed the bold and held in a bare hand.)

The reduction of wear on the barrel was due to how it was lined. (No I don't remember the breakthrough they were talking about.)

I'm trying to find the program both on TouTube and the Discovery Channel Website but am not having much success.

As for longer range rifles I prefer the Ruger M77 in 30-06 or the old venerable Mauser "8mm". (K98) Once you get used to their ballistics they are quite accurate and very reliable.

Mid Range Rifles I'm partial to the Winchester 30-30 followed by the Ruger Ranch Rifles. (Both Mini30 and Mini14.) Reasonably accurate, reasonable take down power for mid sized game including deer and quite reliable with minimum care. (I have hunted with all of these rifles even though I don't own any of them at present.)

Thanks Cat, I guess I'll never get an apology from bobby though, he'll just think we're both lairs.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Now that sounds more reasonable, but Zeb was talking about a belted machine gun, not an m-16, 2 very different weapons and 2 very different rates of fire.

So the bolt of an m16 doesn't get hot but the barrel of a belt fed gun does? You can't have it both ways.

 

[Bobby_3111]

and you better go re-read my original post...nowhere in it do I say the words "a long time ago". In fact I never mentioned a time or how long ago it was.

Now how about you admitting who's really wrong.



Thanks Cat, I guess I'll never get an apology from bobby though, he'll just think we're both lairs.

Zeb do you have any clue about the differences between a belt-fed machine gun and a standard M-16A2/A3 rifle?

An M-16 has 3 settings on the selector switch - safety, semi, and burst. Got that? Ok, now a *belt-fed* machine gun has only a safety on it that locks the trigger. Understand all that? Good.

Now when you fire an M-16 you arent firing at nearly the rate of a machine gun with belted ammunition. Even firing on burst you can go through 3 or 4 30-round mag's and still wouldnt come close to the amount of fire coming from a machine gun.

Now read again what Seacat posted -

*It was a design that is to replace the M-16/M-4 rifle. Instead of using a gas return directly to the bold face as the M-16 does it uses a Piston to impart the recoil to the bolt. This allows the bolt and receiver to remain much cooler.

(The test they showed was two large capacity magazines fired quickly through the weapon then they removed the bold and held in a bare hand.)*

Now as for what he said they did on the show "they removed the bolt and held in a bare hand" the bolt is not the barrel. Hell i've feild stripped the damn things after firing them and the bolt will be warm, bordering on hot but not scorching hot as the barrel obviously will be.

Now a lining of the barrel to help cooling on an M-16 maybe i can see that (I never saw it as a problem myself but to each his own). But he wasnt talking about a belt-fed machine gun firing 200 rounds, he was saying an M-16/M-4 going through a couple of large-capacity magazines (In the army we only had 10 and 30 round mags).

Now do you see the difference there ? Or do i need to link videos showing you the difference between weapons?

 

[Bobby_3111]

So the bolt of an m16 doesn't get hot but the barrel of a belt fed gun does? You can't have it both ways.

No the bolt doesnt get hot either, just warm bordering on hot. If you had ever even used one of those weapons you'd know what the hell you are talking about.