>>65063448
>>>QTDDTOT

>>65063462
Sorry for not posting another Iran vs Israel thread, I'll get back to making those as soon as the cooldown timer for new threads runs down

>>65063448
Wood is always heavier than polymer. This allows you to choose whether you want a lighter rifle that is easier to carry or a heavier rifle that has less felt recoil (assuming everything else is the same). If you go to any pawn shop, then all the time you'll see a hunting rifle that has a super light stock, a carbon fiber barrel, and shoots a big cartridge; you can always find these custom guns for sale on the used market because the owner shot it a few times, found the recoil unpleasant, and got rid of it. On the other hand, anyone shooting .308 or weaker can benefit from the lightweight designs (assuming they are already great shots).

>>65063448
It depends almost entirely on what you mean by "fudd" and "tacticool".

It seems like you're asking "Are rifles with wooden stocks with no subtantial updates to their design in the last 50 years obsolescent?" and if so, then yes.

On the other hand I think that's misrepresenting both what a "tacticool" rifle is and what a "fudd" rifle is. Most fudds these days own tacticool modern sporting rifles, and if they own a durr gun it's probably synthetic.

There are a lot of guns that aren't really either "tacticool" or "fudd", and that probably includes most of the hunting and target rifles that have been released in the last few decades, and yeah, a lot of those have clear advantages over a similar "tacticool" option near that price. Usually they'll be some combination of lighter and much more accurate.

On the point of accuracy, the internet is littered with people who lie about the accuracy of their rifles, and this is especially bad for tacticool guns. Nearly anyone who tells you their tacticool rifle shoots MOA or sub-MOA is, at best, massaging the truth based on some weak and cherry picked data points and often doesn't even realise they're doing it.

>>65063605
I mean like a BAR Mk4 vs an AR10 for example

>>65063466
it's not like /k/ even has enough traffic these days to warrant a QTDDTOT thread too
weird too, cause I remember even just a few years ago this board was decently fast paced instead of the 1-reply-every-hour-if-you're-lucky activity most threads see

There's no difference.
All firearms have intended design purposes and field uses. (Terms OP uses are mere cosmetic adjectives to describe the physical appearance of some firearms and their features, furniture, accessories etc.)

>accuracy
See above. Firearms with myriad physical appearance can be designed and machined to similar standards of precision and shooting accuracy (<--that also depends on ammunition used, and skill/training of the shooter)

>>65063448
i personally got a single shot .22lr with a 23" barrel (Remington Model 514)
its practically just a tube that shoots bullets, but the thing is dead fucking accurate

the biggest part of it though? noise level
you're guaranteed to get full powder burn with the 23" barrel, this makes subsonics extremely quiet, well within hearing-safe
my other 16" .22lr is noticeably louder, and it can't run subsonics either, making it way less suitable for killing pests

currently, however, theres basically nothing on the market in .22lr with a barrel that long
in the modern minmaxed kit, nobody wants the length, even though its quieter

>>65063448
There are advantages, although they do mostly apply to sporting use more than anything else. First up, classic stock shapes just point better. This is due to them putting the wrist and support hand more in line with the barrel. While steep grips favor stability and recoil control, these stocks are better for quick, intuitive shots. Like a shotgun. They also usually pose less of a snagging hazard when used in thick brush, due to having no sharp edges, holes, etc. Helps in keeping quiet. With carbon fiber especially, a modern chassis-style stock with a wraparound handguard will also be far more fragile than a traditional stock, while aluminium will tend to be even heavier than wood stocks. As for wood by itself, it does have some advantages like being a warm material and thus nicer to handle in the cold. The kinks of warping and the like have also been pretty well worked out with the advent of bedding and internal chassis. So a nice thing to have, if you're not torture testing your gun every day. For extreme use cases, a carbon or fiberglass stock is, of course, preferable.

Sadly all of these advantages have long been misrepresented by manufacturers who make shit-tier wood stocks that are bulky, heavy and don't fit properly.

>>65063448
Nah. These days most fudd guns are tactical guns under the hood, like they use chassis, pillar bedding and free floating which are all things that got their start in sniper rifles. Nobody glass beds anymore, and most deer rifle stocks are plastic with a realtree skin. Its also not uncommon for otherwise retrograde wooden rifles to use magpul or aics mags. face it tactichads, we won.

>>65063610
How many 22in barrel AR10s in 308 that shoot MOA with factory ammo with an unloaded weight of 7lb have you seen for an MSRP of $1639?

In don't think an AR10 with those specifications is currently for available for retail sale at all. I think you can get close to any two of the three of weight, barrel length and accuracy if you're willing to pay a lot more than that MSRP, but I'm not actually sure that you can even do all 3 with your own build using commercial parts.

Wood and blued steel is just nice and makes the experience of shooting more enjoyable.

Hunting and sport shooting isn't war, we can allow ourselves to have nice things, not everything has to be min-maxxed.

>>65063448
Cheaper. A $400 Ruger American is a pretty good .308. A $400 AR-10 might blow up on you

>>65063811
Oh, and any rimmed cartridge is going to greatly benefit or can only be found in a "fudd" design

>>65063448
>Do fudd style weapons have any practical advantages other than looking "dignified"?
No. But when it comes to looking dignified holy shit they mogg.

>>65063448
I actually don't mind a nice piece of timber with some patterns, grain and character to it. Spent way too much of my life dragging around something that looked like recycled Subaru car interiors and while that had its place, there's nothing wrong with a bit of tree and a decent bolt or lever action for shooting targets or animals.

>>65063612
Yeah i really hate what has become of this board. I wish they just made a military board so all the tank plane geopolitical slop would be gone even if the board slows down even more, at least it'll be firearm related again. God forbid i want to discuss weapons that i can own . . . and hold . . . and shoot instead of
>omrg bro, have you heard about the united states new fighter jet that travels 3.467996532q35 miles per hour faster than the last fighter jet. This will truly be revolutionary for modern warfare.

>>65063448
Tactically speaking i am 99% sure most of the people blowing off the top of your head with a 6mm Lee-Navy, a Arisaka or a Ethopian Cacarno are better shots than the ones holding a rifle that has any aluminium or plastic in it.

People who like older guns tend to be better shots because they appreciete the guns limitations and work to improve themselves instead of buying something new. Fudds tend to be good shots.

>25 years CCing a Tok

File: download copy.jpg (9 KB, 225x225)

9 KB JPG

>>65063448
>tacticool is just as good
LOL If you think some dipshit stamped/plastic piece of shit is going to deliver the same accuracy as a precision bolt-action, this thread is gonna be hilarious

>>65064087
I mean, coming from other hobbies there's always a contingent of stubborn retards who think every technological innovation after the mid 20th century is a jewish conspiracy and will engage in all kinds of mental gymnastics to rationalize why old and shitty is actually a good thing. I expect guns to be the same. Old and pretty is great, old things generally do look nicer for some reason, but you lose me when you start dismissing things just because of an irrational fear of plastic.

>>65064087
What? Your precision bolt actions all have mlok bipods and AR grips, everything is tacticool now. What are you even picturing when you say stamped?

>>65064538
>Everything is tacticool now
LOL. Only for juvenile faggots playing armyman. My 30yo 700BDL with 3x9 Redfield Widefield Illuminator has a beautiful stock and no bipod gets within 100 yards of it. Yet somehow it hammers enough deer every year to keep my freezer full.
>Stamped
Most AKs and all their derivatives, G3, CETME, the list is a long one....
>Plastic
You know the answer to that without even taking a single breath

>>65064637
The AK is old enough to be your BDL's dad

>>65063448
idk but i went with a sako s20 out of spite for boomers and it was either this or a similar bergara

>>65063612
Yeah, welcome to the pre-ukraine pace. You'd know this if you were here pre-covid

>>65063448
>Do fudd style weapons have any practical advantages other than looking "dignified"?
They will shoot your eye out, sonny. Op is retarded.

>>65064087
>irrational fear of plastic
Speaking of irrational, that's you reading something that wasn't there. I spent 8 years in a green suit, midwit. While it's true I preferred my 240 in the field, I put thousands of rounds through a plasticshit rifle too. Stating the obvious that a mass-produced cheapest bidder military rifle isn't going to outperform a purpose-built, small-run tack-driver is apparently too complicated for you to grasp.
>inb4 muh custom pasticshit that I paid 20 zillion dollars for
Don't bother. When it takes thousands of dollars to cobble together accuracy that barely approached what can be got off the shelf at fucking Walmart for a fraction of that, you're taking your "hobby" into the land of mental illness

>>65064657
You can use mass production techniques to bring down the cost of tack drivers too

>>65063811
Made me curious.

Looks like a Ruger American is pretty accurate. .5 to 1.5 MOA:
https://www.ronspomeroutdoors.com/blog/rugers-new-american-rifle-a-winner

Teh Googlez says something like a S&W M&P15 is a 1.5 - 3 MOA

>>65063448
Give specific examples of a "fudd style" weapon and a non-"fudd style" counterpart, and I will layout what advantages one has over the other.

>>65064973
see >>65063610
There's a discussion I'm looking at now where a guy is claiming 1MOA with a DPMS AR10
That's cheaper than the Browning

>>65063448
They're lighter and better for hunting because they use more powerful cartridges.

>>65063605
>the internet is littered with people who lie about the accuracy of their rifles
This is actually a huge problem I am having trying to improve my shooting. I have no idea what benchmarks to aim for because everyone fucking lies all the time or they post a 3 round group they achieved once and claim "yeah i can do that any day bro trust" and I can't find out what to realistically expect from the guns I'm shooting.

>>65063767
>I'm sure my NRA high power national match AR would dab on WWII era bolt actions
Does anyone really seriously doubt this anymore? Even hand selected No4 Enfield snipers were like 4moa iirc.

>>65063940
Problem is most people here now know effectively fuck all about guns. You think the guys arguing about drones know anything about guns beyond what they can pick up from telegram/twitter shit flinging?

>>65064637
What is the relevance of 1950s/60s military rifles to a discussion of precision rifles? I think everyone reasonably knows that expected accuracy for guns of that period wouldn't hold up for precision shooting, it wasn't meant to.

>>65063515
Apparently guns like that are often sold with half a pack of ammo

>>65063448
that twat is resting the whole weight of the rifle on thr trigger guard

>>65063448
>Do fudd style weapons have any practical advantages other than looking "dignified"?
better made rifles are more accurate and durable. Your entire understanding of yourself as knowlegable in the sli8ghest on guns because you play video games is deeply flawed

File: 1709792982315711.jpg (140 KB, 1021x660)

140 KB JPG

>>65063448
Wood used to be the cheapest, lightest material by which non-wear parts like stocks, grips, and handguards could be made.
Now with polymers, billet aluminum, etc, these parts can be made stronger and lighter so there isn't much need for wood.
I guess it might serve a better purpose for glass bedding or something of the sort, but even that can be done in polymer just fine or better.

More ergonomic to carry by hand. Less stuff sticking out to get caught on shit.

>>65065267
I wondered what part of op's question would cause such an offended response, so I had to reread it a few times and still didn't get it. But after reading the thread, it appears to be perceived as a reasonable question based on the majority of the other posts. So that leaves me to ask, why are you like this?

>>65065414
Wood is just inherently less accurate because of warping, even with glass bedding. It's also less durable. Arguably easier to repair?

Which is why all the arguments on this thread rely on the idea of a wood stock being "high quality" or a gun with a wooden stock being "better made", which is just an argument in favour of better quality guns not "fudd rifles".

My argument in favour of wood stocks is that they just look far better. Same way high gloss bluing looks far better than matte cerakote. It's like classic cars, you're not buying them because they are technically better than a modern car, it's because they feel nicer, they look nicer, the experience is more enjoyable because of that.

>>65063651
There's this things called a suppressor.

>>65065414
>but even that can be done in polymer just fine or better.
Epoxy doesn't stick to most polymers very well. Trying to bed in a plastic stock is a fool's errand. You skip the plastic and use either a metal chassis, or a composite one.

>>65065260
Yep. People think that super-light .300 Win Mag sounds real cool, but then they go shoot it. It recoils worse than a dangerous game rifle because it's a wicked sharp slap rather than a big slow shove.

>>65065154
>and I can't find out what to realistically expect from the guns I'm shooting
Shoot groups with a good sample size (10+ rounds) from a bench rest with bags. Take your time between shots, don't just spit them out as fast as you think you can go. Whatever accuracy you get from that is about the best your rifle will perform. That's your new baseline to compare the rest of your shooting to.

>>65068069
No, that's how that particular gun-and-ammo combination performs. The gun might be substantially more or less accurate with different ammo.

>>65064637
>LOL. Only for juvenile faggots playing armyman. My 30yo 700BDL
STOP RIGHT THERE!!!!!!!
The anon you are replying to clearly says "now"
If your rifle is old enough to have credit card debt and google searches for norwood pattern baldness, it is not from the "now"

>>65068074
Run the test with different ammo, numbnuts. Nobody's stopping you from getting the bags out to see how cheap ammo really performs.

>>65068076
Norwood pattern baldness is no longer a measure of age since Zoomers are going bald in highschool

>>65067079
It's not like people are making barrels out of wood though

>>65068091
People make log cannons all the time

>>65063448
>fudd style weapons
kys retarded zoomer

File: 1770823441303242.jpg (45 KB, 680x381)

45 KB JPG

>>65063466
Kek, this. This is at least a mildly interesting topic.
Being a 35 year old boomer myself, I feel the draw of Dr pepper and walnut. Allow this young man his thread.

First off let’s agree on what a fudd gun is.
>Anything but semi-automatic unless it’s WW2/M1A milsurp
>Large caliber for the class of weapon
>No pistol grips
>No optics except for scopes
>Wood furniture
>No box fed magazines on anything that isn’t milsurp
The fudds are the kings of the brush guns and hunting rifles. Low tech generalists and to be fair there are few things you can’t kill with 5 .30 caliber bullets.
>Tacticool
>Modularity above God
>High capacity
>Rattle canned, coyote, or black
>Metal and synthetics only
>Autistic specialization pushing the boundaries of 5.56 and 7.62 as far as mathematically possible
Don’t break into a tactifags house. They are desperately praying for the opportunity to dump down the stairwell. With the average self defense scenario is closer to dusting middle eastern goat herders and Central American narcos than assaulting an entrenched position the edge in CQB is obvious.

Personally I like all guns but have a special place in my heart for the late boomer era firearm niche where fudd met tactifag and we got shit like the Mini-14, the USAS and SPAS 12s, Scout Rifles, and the Bren Ten. These guns have soul and moderately updated tech without being fucking boring.

>>65065154
>Even hand selected No4 Enfield snipers were like 4moa iirc.
Not even close.
The Brits were ~1.5 MOA for acceptance as a sniper rifle, same as the US.
The Germans were slightly worse at ~1.6 MOA. Suprisingly the Russians had the lowest at ~1.4 MOA.

>>65063940
>>65065154
>>65063612
one of the problems is one if the jannies (the only janny?) on /k/ is a slav or German or something and hangs out in the war tourist threads and they give the jannies a lot of leeway in deciding what is or isnt allowed on their board so he keeps his threads around even though they are technically against the rules in the sticky.
if you go read the leak the no gunz board should have been made a while ago because they
"only really make new boards when something on topic disrupts normal discussion to the point where it overwhelms the board"
and then they specifically cited needing /vt/ because /jp/ was mostly vtubers. also see /mlp/ and/co/ but the /jp/ janny is an autists and idk what actually is allowed on /jp/ because threads about japanese history/culture or like japanese baseball arent allowed.
/k/ jannies like the war shit and /meg/.
I think the only exception is that they made /vg/ and maybe /vp/ to get all those generals off /v/ because they were dominating the board. but then they keep creating poorly jannied /v/ subboards to try to reduce traffic in /v/ because /v/ and /vg/ are too fast to janny but no one uses them because the jannies are usually faggots on the subboards. like apparently one of the /vr/ jannies is some nortious tranny from the doom community that has shat up every other retro gaming and doom forum in existence

>>65069855
Just googled it to check myself, it seems more like acceptance (for a No4) was 2.5 MOA (or 5" @ 200 yard, per Skennerton), looks like I was getting 4 MOA from " Capt. Shore relates, “An excellent shot with good rifle, iron sights, and standard Mk VII ammunition would put up consistent five shot 3” to 4” groups at 100 yards" but it could also just be a bad source I've seen elsewhere misquoting it.
https://www.thearmorylife.com/the-no-4-mk-i-t-sniper-battle-ready-accuracy/
It could also be I've misread a FOM stat (or read it misinterpreted):
https://www.leeenfieldresource.com/enfield-accurizing
Now what that FOM stat means for snipers I don't know, where were you getting figures from? For the No4T at least I can't find any specific accuracy mention, only the standards No4 2.5 MOA equiv figure.

Cant speak to the other nations much so I'll take your word for it but it'd be good to see a source. I have seen a British table comparing a variety of rifles to each other for accuracy before from around 1945-1950 but can't find the fucking thing now as is always the case.

>>65069967
Fuck you for making me dig out my Skennerton. Too many damn books to do spur of the moment searching. You are right as well.
4 MOA is the general acceptance for military rifles. For the past century pretty much every infantry rifle in every country has had to be within the 5-3.5 MOA range.
No4(T)s were tested - 7 of 7 in a 5" diameter circle at 200 yards and 6 of 7 in a 10" diameter circle at 400 yards. Good rifles from testing were rebuilt and scoped.
From memory the American sniper rifle standards were 100 yards and 1.5" circle. They built dedicated rifles and rebuilt exceptional ones from the production line.
The Germans were supposedly 5cm at 100m, varied quite a bit as many factories had issues. They tried building dedicated rifles with not too much success. The preferred rifle was simply an exceptional K98 with a scope added on.
The Russians were 3cm at 100m. They selected the most accurate during testing and scoped them. They had so many that many sniper stamped rifles were never scoped and simply sent to line units.

>>65066694
No offense, but you aren't outshooting an FNAR with an AR-10 dollar for dollar. You can get an FNAR for like $800. Just make sure you don't get raped on mags, but that's almost impossible unless the fudd selling it to you doesn't know any better.

>>65063448
The main practical advantage is that they're not homosexual, it's so weird hearing about fudds from people who massacre perfectly functional weapons to add gay accessories they have no use of or red dots and shit just to shoot a gun at hugging distance and everyone who likes to keep most of the design original is somehow a fudd

>>65070127
Fudds are bad in their own ways, just like CAGLARP guys are bad in their own different ways. You can criticize both crowds, and that's just two of the many crowds of gun owners and you should know this.

>>65070094
Anytime accuracy is measured in groups it's fake and retarded, who gives a fuck if a gun can print holes in paper that have q certain pattern from a set distance and bench rest? Might as well put it in a vise and pull the trigger with a cord.
The question is can you consistently shoot something or different things at various distances while holding the gun in your hands.
I mean if you shoot a rifle long range yeah you should know what moa is and how to adjust your scope and whatnot but we're talking about 300, 400, 500 meter and more distance, not what youtube guntards in tactical gear do.

>>65070130
The only genuine fudds I've met were a few and were the hunters who yap about rifles needing to have an engraved wooden stock because everything else is apparently too modern and yeah they were annoying and didn't really know shit about guns.
I mean I find hunters annoying in general with their theories on which round you should use to kill a wild pig as if it's gonna survive any rifle bullet as long as it's hit correctly kek
>>65070132
> 1x magnification
That's called iron sights

>>65070137
To clarify I don't mean the obvious like don't hunt with a 22 but their extensive yapping about common and economical cartridges being useless and you needing a specific rare European caliber that's only found in some stores and costs too much instead of a 308 for example.
I'm 100% sure no wild animal is gonna survive getting shot by a 308 or 7.62x54 or anything like that minus an elephant and the point of having guns is being able to shoot them and being able to find shit to shoot out of them

I hate the anti-fudd crowd that took over in my country and a lot of countries in Europe now, it's impossible to find a normal 1911 or cz75 or anything like that for a reasonable price because all you see in stores is glocks, glock clones, or other shit similar to glocks and glock clones with shitcatinny rails and other shit, like why the fuck would you intentionally make a pistol bigger when you're just gonna lug it around in a holster and shoot it on a nice sunny day at the range ffs, people fought the bloodiest and most terrifying wars without attachments on their guns and you need a flashlight on a gun you're scared of scratching up

>>65070139
They probably think the guys who go hog hunting with ARs are somehow being counterproductive.

>>65070149
According to what? Nothing against you personally but every time I've heard that from someone is when he didn't even know how tu use irons out of sheer ignorance and hatred towards anything made before he's born.
I have a fucked up eyesight and still manage to hit shit easily with an sks that's got nothing screwed to it.
You look through the rear sight and over the front one and see the target, pull trigger, done. You can't tell me this is hard to do

>>65070155
No they just think they're not "real hunters" as if that means anything, I could say real hunters hunt with rocks and bows and would technically be right, it doesn't make any sense and is a dumb way to think.
But I'd really like to be wrong but everyone I've met who owns an ar is a showoff and uses his gun for dick measurement contest, though I'm biased and don't like the AR anyway, most of them suck except the old ones

>>65070139
>>65070155
As a 'pest exterminator' there's really no way to do this job economically without a lot of ammunition. With 556 and 308 being essentially shot in the 1000's each year and yep, its out of essentially military rifles.
If I was using something else other than those two and once in a while I do use 12G and 300win mag, there would be nothing left in terms of money after you pay for fuel, the traveling time, helicopter hire and whatever else comes along like poisons and baits.
Sort of why I tell people who aim to do a lot of shooting is to pick the ammo you're going to use a lot, then find the rifle to shoot it out of to find a good mix of what works for your budget, effectiveness and whatever peripherals you need to make it work like scopes, thermals and other bits and pieces. That may mean if you're using a good old boy Winchester, Sako, Tikka or any number of reputable brands of hunting rifles that have been around for years.

>>65070190
You must use .300 Win Mag or you're not a real hunter.

>>65070195
Honestly, the excuses to shoot off a 300 win mag are really lame, mostly its me justifying to myself that I just can't be fucked walking any closer

>>65070077
If it's any consolation I spent about half an hour trying to find a rifle accuracy trials table in Jonathan Fergusons bullpups book because I remembered it having a bunch of relevant service rifles in it. Couldn't find it.

>>65070155
To be honest, most hog hunters are being counterproductive. If you don't take out the whole sounder, which is nearly impossible by any method other than trapping, all you're doing is teaching them to fear humans more, making them harder to eradicate in the future. This has nothing to do with the type of gun, in fact an AR is a much better hog deleter than a fuddstick, it has to do with the type of tactic being fundamentally flawed.

>>65071271
Maybe I should go on one of those hog hunting expeditions to pick off only the weakest looking most naive pigs. The idea of creating a future race of stealth ninja superpigs is strangely appealing

>>65067114
post yours

Wow I forgot I made this thread

Designed for hunting ethically while often looking nice.

>>65071271
>5.56mm is better for killing wild hogs
This is how you say you've never handled an AR, or hunted hogs, in your short, irrelevant life.

>>65079864
>ARs only come in one caliber
Anon, I......

>>65079864
You have not killed more hogs than the people in >>65079607's video.

>>65079760
I read this as "designed for hunting while ethnically white" and I was trying to figure out if it was a correct or incorrect statement, probably a sign I need less 4chan

File: so-witty.gif (101 KB, 640x514)

101 KB GIF

>>65081112
Keep reaching, faggot.

>>65063448
The wood furniture can be burned for warmth or eaten as a fiber supplement in survival situations.

>>65064637
>claim: everything is tacitcool NOW
>counterclaim: nuh uh, my 30 year old rifle isn't
Do you just not know the difference between now and then? Does time not hold any meaning to you? The logic here can only make sense if you don't actually know that 30 years ago, 1996, is not now, 2026.

File: 143633.png (1.39 MB, 1014x718)

1.39 MB PNG

>>65063448
Wood connects your soul to the land
polymer connects your soul to the petrochemical industry
If I need to explain to you why one is evil and one is good you are already lost

A person that owns a polymer AR is 10000% more likely to take it up the ass
I know this because I'm the one fucking them

File: John_Cena_-_The_Time_Is_Now[1].jpg (21 KB, 316x316)

21 KB JPG

>>65084052
MY TIME IS NOW

>>65084101
Do you use a wood or polymer strap on?

>>65063448
THE AR-15 IS THE FUDD WEAPON RIGHT NOW.
ACCEPT IT.
THERE IS NO MORE GAY NIGGER OLD MAN BULLSHIT THAN YET ANOTHER PLAIN BLACK FUCKING AR-15. OOOOOOO! NO THIS ONE TIME IT HAS A LITTLE BLUE PIECE BURIED IN THE RECEIVER ITS THE FUCKIN SPORT MODEL OOOOOO!

>>65087455
They hated jesus for telling the truth

>>65063462
fuck off back to /g/.

>>65064995
Now have it be repeatable and not just a statistical anomaly

>>65063612
You are a newfag war tourist. This was always a slow board. Until 2022, that is.

>>65063612
I used to lurk in the late 10s and this place was great, decent pace but not fast enough the thread would be dead if you checked it later in the day. Based faggots talking about guns and sharing knowledge while occupational eating cum laced food. Now it's got army recruiting and anons straight up telling you to register your sbr with the atf.

>>65089327
Seething brown thirdie

File: copehagen.jpg (176 KB, 1007x1007)

176 KB JPG

>>65079864
>my way of hunting wild boar is the only way to hunt wild boar
okay boomer. the rest of us are hooning around on dead silent electric motorbikes with nvg's with ar's. you can, uh, angrily type a letter to your local newspaper on your typewriter i guess about you walked up hill bothways to shoot a boar every 12 hours

File: IMG_5994.jpg (1.61 MB, 4027x1694)

1.61 MB JPG

>>65087455
THE POWER OF FUDD COMPELS YOU

File: laughing-01-1-scaled.jpg (320 KB, 2560x1043)

320 KB JPG

>>65091149
>moped commando rage
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

>>65091103
>H&K 770
+ Excellent accuracy, cold hammer forged polygonal barrel is of the finest quality
+ Trigger is excellent for a factory semi-auto hunting rifle
+ Runs reliably with both light and heavy projectiles without much shift in the point of impact
+ Cycles extremely fast and recoils very flat, making follow-up shots nearly instant
+ Top cover is made of from a massive chunk of milled steel and fitted to the receiver via rails, fitment is super tight, optic mounted on the top cover keep zero.
- Disassembly procedure is legit retarded, takes several tools and like 10 minutes just to get the bolt out of the gun
- Shits where it eats and needs to be cleaned very often
- Placement of the manual safety is an afterthought, just slapped on the side of the left rifle, needs to be operated with the left hand
- Mangles the absolute fuck out of brass, bending the entire case heads beyond repair
- Doesn't lock open on empty
- VERY strong recoil spring and fancy trickery to provide extra leverage when cycling the action, retard-strength must be applied to the bolt handle.
- Loading MUST be done by SLAMMING the bolt shut using the manual bolt hold/release button, it'll fail to go into battery otherwise and there's no good way to manually push the bolt into battery
- Known to slamfire SKS-style
- SLAMMING the bolt shut like this is loud as fuck, not good on a hunting rifle
- Mags are flimsy pieces of shit, extremely expensive if you ever manage to find any for sale
- proprietary optics mounting solution sucks, OEM scope mounts are really bad

>>65099314
* -VERY strong recoil spring and NO fancy trickery to provide extra leverage

>>65063448
If I'm hunting and I want to kill a deer, a bolt action rifle is a great choice, can choose caliber, no magazine underneath that can interfere with shooting prone, I'm not swapping optics regularly...a remmy700 series in 308 is just about perfect. you don't get mag dump endorphins but you get a deer.
I don't know what the tacticool answer to shooting quail or pheasant would be, but I've got a winchester 101 over/under that's a better option than a AR platform.

>>65099325
>shooting prone
Why are you shooting deer on freshly mown grass?

>>65099343
I'm in arizona, its open desert, no grass. Some long shots though because there's no cover for you or the deer.

>>65063605
>gun shoots multiple sub moa groups
>no you gun doesnt actually do that this is cherry picked!!!

>>65087455
Honestly true. The 16 inch m4gery is the 30-06 model 70 of our time

>>65063924
>I actually don't mind
Really you like guns with wood and blueing?

>>65064637
>Yet somehow it hammers enough deer
Is that really the metric we're using for precision rifles?

>>65063605
>rifles with wood stocks and no updates in 50 are obsolete
Yeah, not even close to being true as a blanket statement and incorrect to the point of stupidity for combat/defense operations. There's a fucking reason certain Marine Corps and Army units have been digging M14s out of the back of the armory for every shitty conflict since Vietnam and if urban combat started tonight in my city, my Garand and M700 BDL are doing work at stand-off ranges long before the plasticshit gets pulled out of the safe. You're attempting to lump wood-stocked designs that fucking work like a champ and were ONLY retired because a bunch of smartass procurement asshats and politicians decided they could save money buying simplified trash in with fucking matchlocks and flinters. Piss off with that stupid mindset. People with that rationale would have retired the M2 BMG 40 years ago and are actively fucking up aircraft and shipbuilding to this day. Replacing the 1911 with a piece of shit M9 and widespread fielding of malfunctioning M16s during the middle of a fucking war is what you people do. Get fucked in the ear, faggot.

>>65102646
Really?
Oh, you mean accurate marksmanship that actually matters? Most people shooting woodies actually shoot at stuff that requires a bit more skill than a slice of fucking paper or a gong, sport. And you even asking that question is a fairly bright faggot-detector alarm that you're one of parasites on this board who doesn't who doesn't shoot anything but your pathetic little peen-load after masturbating to internet stories.

>>65099347
If you've got any pronghorn in your area, they're fun to hunt in the open. Do it wrong and those fuckers are GONE! lol

>>65104235
I hope you're trolling. There is no way someone like you is actually browsing here. This is straight out of 2005.

>>65104242
Which is why prone is nice sometimes, take a breath, let it out, squeeze off the shot as the sights drop through your target, watch them drop.

>>65104271
>straight out of 2005
How would you know? You weren't even born yet, midwit.

>>65104272
True. Gotta find them first, tho.

>finally get a 16 gauge
>Suddenly have far more contempt for poor people than previously
its a good feeling

Without looking, I'm going to assume at least half of the posts in here are zoomers LARPing as fudds by having fits over sights that are anything but irons and pistol grips and polymer

>>65108047
Half the posts are one guy bumping the thread and then deleting his posts so it doesn't add to the post count. op really needs this.

>>65108591
Op here, I've probably got 5 posts ITT and they were all in the first couple of days. I keep seeing it in the catalog and I'm amazed that the thread is still up, and pleased that it is still causing butthurt

>>65063448
Preference and taste. To some, fudd guns feel great. Too some, ARs feel terrible. Just one example

>>65108591
>bumping the thread and then deleting his posts so it doesn't add to the post count
Oh that's the engagement bot spazzing out again, but there's a solid chance it and OP are one and the same

>>65112241
Threads like these are always bunk, in that you know OP already has an established opinion.

>>65112258
Gotta keep those engagement numbers up man. Up next, why revolvers destroy all semiautos in every situation and why the XM7 is actually fucking awesome.

>>65112268
Yeah, I'm not sure what the point is exactly besides triggering a tactical circle jerk. If OP doesn't understand hunting guns and doesn't like them, he doesn't need to be making rhetorical threads baiting people to his viewpoint

>>65112258
It was a serious question and I have learned something, I think. Other than learning that you guys will get mad over anything, what I think the answer is, is that it's cheaper to make an accurate bolt action fudd gun in walnut and blued steel that can only hold 3 rounds than it is to make an accurate FN SIG HK 11.45 SCARBOG-XM17 that holds over 9000 rounds. Right? Like did I miss anything important? It doesn't seem so.

>>65117518
>it's cheaper to make an accurate bolt action
Yes.
>in walnut and blued steel
No. Those look great, but they won't be cheap.

>>65118485
Mossberg makes their retro 500s in walnut (iirc) and blued steel which are cheaper than the standard model

>>65117518
One big part that makes "fudd" guns look different to "tactical" is lack of pistol grip. Pistol grip is usually considered better when shooting prone or from awkward stances and helps manipulating the gun. Traditional stock and grip on the other hand point better. Thats why olympic shotguns and hunting rifles still have traditional stocks and grips while militaries and long range shooters have moved to more vertical pistol grip.

>>65117518
>Other than learning that you guys will get mad over anything
Good point. /k/ was always the easiest board to troll, but the tone of the board in 2026 is butthurt by default, people nowadays go into threads already seething about some shit regardless of the topic. My theory is that the board is simply a retirement home for millennial losers, the guys who were underage posting in 2011 never left and it didn't matter then that they were wasting long hours because they were carefree highschoolers and their whole life was in front of them, but now they're over 30 and burned out and bitter that life didn't go how they had hoped. All of the /k/ users Ive interacted without outside of /k/ (both on other platforms and IRL) have fit roughly into that age bracket and socio-economic status; and so I figure that's representative of the average user.

>>65123603
4chan used to be for outcasts and it turns out the outcasts don’t always succeed in the end. There was this image people tried to cultivate of the nerd becoming rich and that doesn’t always happen. Not sure why anyone else would be here on a Friday night.

File: 33327348_1.jpg (20 KB, 1024x425)

20 KB JPG

>>65099314

>>65123633
>There was this image people tried to cultivate of the nerd becoming rich
Nerds (smart, studious people) do become rich. Geeks (eccentric enthusiasts of a niche interest) and dorks (odd, socially awkward people) don't.

>>65064087
>>65064637
This shit is gonna get 50 (you)s, isn't it?

>>65123633
>Not sure why anyone else would be here on a Friday night
What an interesting thing to judge success by

>>65124769
Don't forget the most tragic people, slackers who happen to be smart and talented