post terrible guns with great aesthetics
M16 pre-A1
>>65505841>pre-A1>has forward assist
>>65505842The original M16 which lacked the forward assist was an Air Force gun. The M16 the Army adopted in the tens of thousands, sent to Vietnam and which caused all the reliability controversy was the XM16E1, it had a forward assist. The Air Force kept their M16's, it was the Army that traded their XM16E1's for M16A1's. The mag release button doesn't have a ridge around it so the gun in that picture is an XM16E1.
>>65505890>mag release button doesn't have a ridge around itNot discernable in that pic (also the muzzle flash hider is not seen)It's an M16A1, obviously
>>65505830
>>65505952>Not discernable in that pic (also the muzzle flash hider is not seen)I can see it just fine but here is a larger pic that better discerns it for you.>It's an M16A1, obviouslyNow why would you say this when you just said you can't tell from the pic? Anyway, it is an XM16E1.
>>65505958Whops, forgot the pic.
>>65505890>>65505962
>>65505962Where's the flash hider?okay, the lower receiver has the XM mag release buttonMarines were using different lowers/uppers in 1968 (by which time the A1 had become official standard)What is the date this photograph was taken?
>>65505955exactly the sort of thing i was thinking ofgod i wish remington wasn't retarded
>>65505890>Colt AR-15 / model 601Adopted in small numbers by the USAF, and the US army.Unfenced magazine release, chrome plated bolt carrier, chrome plated chamber and bore, solid rubber buttpad, small triangular charging handle, no forward assist, underweight buffer, most but not all had furniture painted green, or undyed brown furniture>Colt model 602 (late-production versions marked "M16" by Colt)Adopted on a wide scale by the USAF Effectively identical to the 601, but with black dyed furniture and a slightly different 3-prong flash hider. May or may not have an enlarged charging handle.>Colt M16 / model 604Cost-reduced mass production version of the 602, adopted on a wide scale by the US Army and USMC, some also purchased by the USAFCharging handle enlarged, bolt carrier no longer chromed, chamber and bore no longer chromed.Prone to issues caused by chamber corrosion (failures to extract, failures to feed)Prone to dead-trigger jams on full auto due to excessive bolt velocity and insufficient buffer mass.>Colt XM16E1 / Colt model 603 / Early M16A1All have the enlarged T-shaped charging handleForward assist added.Chamber and bore chrome lined.Heavier buffer added.Production also subcontracted out to General Motors and H&R in addition to Colt.May or may not a chromed bolt carrier.May or may not have a fenced magazine release.May or may not have a trapdoor buttock.Equipped with either a 3-prong flash-hider or an A1 birdcageExactly what combination of parts these rifled had varied depending on whatever the manufacturers happened to have on hand at the time. Upgraded features from the 603/E1/A1; heavy buffers, improved barrels, and trapdoor stocks were retroactively added to most earlier rifles.The USAF rifles remained in service and were repaired with regular M16A1(and later) parts, they remained in service for decades, Frankensteined together with more modern parts.
>>65505848man, that looks weird
>>65506018>A1>May or may notM16A1 had the birdcage flash hider and lower receiver 'fence' around the magazine release button>'whatever the manufacturers'85,000 XM16E1 rifles were produced by ColtLate 1967 the A1 was in full production and other contracts awarded to H&R, General Motors Hydra-Matic Div.
>>65506033
>>65506038
>>65506040
>>65506043
>>65506045
>>65506050I think it looks fine.
>>65506051
>>65505962Men used to be so small
>>65506051>the turd right under the sling Lol
>>65505955Picrel was my first handgun. I don't regret it but only put 3 mags through it. I hated the DD version that still sucked but also changed just enough visually to ruin the unique look to it. Hudson reminds me of the R51 quite a bit desu. I'd say the Hudson is overall more reliable IF you paradoxically have one of the ones that has good parts, but unless you get a Cambridge Manufacturing made shitty part, it is good to go. Just shoots low and isn't that impressive and I kind of hate the trigger. But it is damn gorgeous.
>>65506045I have shot two of these in my life. One was a rental, and one was owned by a rich buddy of mine. They suck ass to shoot. The stock in uncomfortable, the semi-auto function worked sometimes, and the pump handle was weirdly slippery. Don't get me wrong, the gun is cool as fuck. But if had my choice, I would glady choose the M3 over it. The M3 I shot (same rich friend) worked flawlessly and was much more comfortable. I know his SPAS-12 was clean, he is one of those meticulous kinda guys.
>>65506537>ouch
>>65506038But the M14 isn't bad tho.
>>65508263>two rich friendsIt's ok anon, being a twink is ok if you shoot cool guns.
>>65506570What kind of queer ass comment is this
>>65506030Calico pistol.
>>65508297>not sure if trolling or actually retarded
>>65505969>Where's the flash hider?out of frame
>>65508263>They suck ass to shoot. The stock in uncomfortable, the semi-auto function worked sometimes,As per that furry guntuber, it's extremely picky about shells. SPAS-12 owners have to check which brand cycles reliably, and stick exclusively to that one. Of course, that doesn't cure its front-heaviness. >and the pump handle was weirdly slippery. There's a non-zero chance the plastic is degrading. Old plastic (particularly from specific time periods) becomes oily as it breaks down.
>>65508782
>>65508749No verification then of that rifle's flash hider type(unless an uncrop/larger version of the photograph exists)
>>65508860It doesn't matter. This all started when someone thought the A1 model was the first to have a forward assist, saw it as an easy to spot mistake and tried doing a call out.>pre-A1>has forward assistThey were wrong, the armies standard issue rifle had them. Then they tired to claim it was obviously an A1 despite the lower not matching, then tried to claim that some A1's had earlier lowers. If they have to Google CSI their way into this being some XM16e1/M16a1 Frankenstein because they were wrong about the forward assist then it's all just being pedantic to save a bad call out at that point. Not going to worry about it.
>>65508757Oh really? I did not know that, and I dont think the owner did either because we were basically shooting random leftover shells out of it. Maybe 6 or 7 different brands. I did not know that about the plastic either. I guess it would make sense. It was an older gun, and had been though a few other owners.
>>65505830Ots 14 Groza
>>65509403doesnt groza mean Basket in russian?
>>65509414Idk
>nobody posted this bad boy yet
ZH29 looks like an art deco sci-fi novellist’s description of a future rifle, especially with that ribbed aluminum heat sink. But the gun kinda sucks despite being beautiful and ahead of its time.
I thought these looked really cool in CoD4, especially with the transparent magazine. Too bad this have issues IRL
>>65509496>At the time NATOs expectations were to try and hold a Russian conventional attack for 72 hours or so while they decide whether or not to escalate to nuclear weapons. >HK develops cheap nylon wasters meant to be ergonomic and simple ebough for conscripts and durable enough for 72 hours of intense fighting before other means are used>everyone loses their mind when it turns out that kind of product doesn’t make for great multi-decade service rifles that get deployed to the deserts of central asia instead of the forests and towns of central europe. Yeah
>>65509471>tfw Euro>tfw just missed my chance to buy an honest to god TEC-9Kinda salty but maybe it was actually a blessing
>>65509524>cheap nylon wasterThey are not cheap. For the money they spent on crapping out these things they COULD have had a rifle with a multi decade service life. Everything else is just cope.
>>65506045Blasphemy
Tec-9s are quite terrible, but quite cool.>>65505830The original Sigmas as a whole have kind of a neat cheap minimalist thing going on. The .380 one especially looks like something you could buy out of a vending machine in Shadowrun or something.>>65505962That does look like an unfenced lower.>>65506031>>65505969Flash hider will actually vary, the M16A1 had the same three-pronged hider as the M16 at first, the birdcage one came to replace it in production (the prong tended to get stuck on things innajungle).>>65506045The SPAS-12 is really not terrible at all, assuming it has a not-expired buffer (cheap and easy to fix now), it runs very reliably if you feed it actual combat loads. It's just outdated and heavy for what it is.
>>65506038Not terrible.>>65506040Gonna depend on manufacturing and gassing.>>65506043Only situationally terrible. It was never widely issued because people wanted more range and power, but it was suitable enough for its intended role of a PDW for pilots and shit, and by that metric the AKs-74u is leagues better than the MP7 and P90.>>65506033First time U.S Marines got Thompsons they fucking loved them.For the later wartime M1 and M1A1 patterns, those were entirely alright, even if not the best at anything.>>65506050Kinda terrible, but more than anything they are a complete letdown compared to the MP5. Shoulda made more MP5/10s instead.
>>65508263>the semi-auto function worked sometimesProbably used underpowered ammo or the recoil buffer had dried out. Possibly both.>>65508745The M14 in practice isn't appreciably much worse than the G3 or FAL, the main big deal was serious production problems and a dragged out program.The BM59 is often considered better for the sake of doing basically the same thing but in the fraction of the time and money spent, and it could use already existing M1 tooling and parts for much of it.
>>65508782Now, these aren't terrible at all, they are above average for their time period, and are still good target pistols today. You're really just spamming.>>65509403Weren't they just considered very mediocre? Not terrible, people just wished they were better.
>>65508082>>65506051There's moreMuch, much, more.
>>65510307These are good carry pistols, people are just trigger snobs.
8MOA lol no wonder Rhodies lost
>>65510447Yea I don't follow the CSX controversy (and have never tried one out) but it seems like they're a decent modern subcompact carry for people who prefer the 1911 manual of arms.Smith & Wesson's post-2000s semiauto handguns overall have been pretty good.
>>65510307Eh, my main complaint was no way to mount a light. Trigger wasn't great but it certainly wasn't some scream yourself awake nightmare some made it out to be>>65511027I'd say of all the major American gun manufacturers S&W took the turn of the millennium the best. I mean look at Rugers automatics, especially after they discontinued the P series (which weren't even all that good to begin with). And don't get me started on Colt
>>65506053The 30-06 version has the (terrible) straight mag, that one is a lebel model
>>65511000wasted trips
>>65510307>>65511106The main issue I had with one when I handled one was the safety, felt about as low profile as a Glock slide release and combined with being quite stiff I didn't feel confident that I could have disengaged it reliably under stress. Maybe it was just because the gun was brand new and it would've loosened up, though, and idk if they've improved it on the E-Series.
>>65508303>illiterateit's ok anon sucking strangers for smack is ok too
