>>107595

>>107588

Gonna go look at the FN tomorrow, may also look at their SCAR 16.

Another fren was sucking X-95 dick. So not an AR but very interesting in theory. Might like, IDK.

>>107605
I'm a big fan of the SCAR 16. It's a great shooter and the only problems I've ever had with the gun were short stroking when I put the gas regulator on suppressed, and when I managed to jam a round in the chamber backwards while trying to admin unload the gun. (Rolled snake eyes, critical miss.)

A Gesissele Super SCAR trigger is a must and I recommend some kind of rail extension. (PWS or KDG)

But, in reality, I hardly shoot mine anymore after building an AR for competition with an adjustable gas block and lightweight recoiling parts. The SCAR is heavier and has a huge amount of reciprocating mass. It's like the gun just pushes you around. A muzzle brake doesn't help much, since the brake works immediately as you fire, then some milliseconds later the bolt hits the back of the receiver and you get a thump.

Another note about the SCAR, gen 2 pmags do not drop free and need to be modified just slightly to prevent the bolt stop from riding up. Gen 3 pmags work great.

However, if I needed a straight up combat gun to fight space aliens, the SCAR would be my go-to. But if the threat consists of robots, dinosaurs, or robot dinosaurs, I grab the HCAR.

>>107603
Didn't Tromix do that like over a decade ago?

The FN was nice.

Whereas, I like the SCAR, I'm more familiar with the AR/M4 platform.

And the X95 felt oddly natural, and nice and short.

Ah yeah, sorry about that gentlemen. Forgot it's SFW board.

  >>107609
The episode on the Pedersen device is the definitive work on the piece.

For anyone that's new to C&Rsenal, check out the Pedersen device, the BAR, the Lewis gun episodes. They're fantastic.

>>107266
>getting bulldozed into a mass grave by the national guard to own the libs

holy fuck keep gore images out, dang it.

>>107269

Unlikely, and besides; death is preferable to living under another AWB.

If the AWB returns, we really have nothing else to lose at that point.

Anyways, why are we letting anti-gun shills and lefties shit all over the board?

>>107269
You sure showed him!

>>107407
>weak stomach
>on /k/
lmao someone show this noob the avra valley shoot video

Yeah, I'm sensing some rose tinted glasses. Even if it were that cheap at that time, the dollar doesn't go as far for anything as it did back then. 5 cents per round is absolutely a reasonable price right now.

Meanwhile, where are you getting 50 caliber pellets for less than 22lr prices? Best I'm seeing on them is like 20 cents per.

>>107575

In 2006 I grabbed a bulk deal that was less than 1 cpr. Hardly the norm, though.

For air slugs being less than .22, he has to be talking about casting, which doesn’t take into account time gathering range scrap, smelting cost, tools, and electricity/propane cost. Hardly less than 6 cpr.

In 2008, I typically paid $20 for a 525 round box of Remington Golden Bullets. .22lr is easy to find again in stores in my area, but the price has stayed up at the 8 to 11 cpr range.

>>107575
>>107574
Well, it's been a long time, I think it was actually the 1000rd bricks. Still cheap as fuck.

>>107576
I am talking about casting. I've spent plenty of time casting boolits for muzzleloaders, I don't see my time spent on it as a monetary expense if it's simply supporting my hobby. And tools are one time expenses.

Definitely cheaper than a powder burner.

The original CO2 guns looked good.

>>107561
>"Sunngård's concept was that in a gunfight, someone with his pistol could goad their opponent into firing 7 or 8 rounds (the typical capacity of an automatic pistol at the time), and they exploit an advantage when the opponent had to reload. Presumably, one would make sure not to get hit by any of those first 7 or 8 rounds…"

So the idea behind this was literally "shoot me and see what happens asshole."

>>107568
Exactly. Such was the selling point of higher capacity pistols in the 1890s that touted having a few more shots than a standard revolver and in a detachable magazine that could be reloaded faster. All true, but most gunfights typically were over after only a few shots were fired.

Such as with the Borchardt C-93 (Construktion 93) semi-automatic pistol that was designed by Hugo Borchardt and Georg Luger in 1893 based upon the Maxim toggle-bolt design. Borchardt also developed the high-velocity bottlenecked 7.65×25mm Borchardt cartridge for the C-93. With about 1,100 manufactured by Loewe and nearly 2,000 more produced by Deutsche Waffen und Munitionsfabriken, the Borchardt C-93 was the first mass-produced semi-automatic pistol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borchardt_C-93

The 7.65×25mm Borchardt had an 8-round detachable box magazine, but that wasn't much more firepower than a standard six-shooter. Pistols like the Borchardt and the 10-shot Mauser C96 were technology demonstrators that ushered in the time of the automatics.

  Early Automatic Pistols https://youtu.be/t51TgOlnSSc
Forgotten Weapons - Published on Jul 21, 2011
A general look at a couple of early automatic pistol designs, and what they have in common. We have a Bergmann-Bayard M1910/21, a C96 "Broomhandle" Mauser, and an Astra M900.

  Development of the Luger Automatic Pistol https://youtu.be/rIX1EL1hTmE
Lugers! there are approximately a gazillion different recognized varieties, because the pistol became so popular and iconic. And yet...they all kinda look the same, don't they? (If you are a Luger collector, don't answer that!) A great many ( I daresay the significant majority) of the Luger variations are minor changes in production details. So, what was involved in the mechanical evolution of the Luger?

Not much, really - which is a testament to the talents of Georg Luger. He got the gun almost totally right on his first try. There are, however, two major variants of the Luger mechanically - the 1900 model and the 1906 model. In this video I will walk through the differences between these two, as well as the initial Borchardt pistol that Luger used as his starting point and a couple other relevant milestones (a Swiss trials gun and a transitional French trials gun). And since they are the most common of the military models, we will also take a quick look at the German Army, Navy, and Artillery models.

  >>107529
Timely! Ian discusses the Sunngård Automatic Pistol.

>I am wondering if anyone has gone through and compiled all of this information in an easy to consume lecture or report

I'm sure someone has (for their full time job).
Do you also want to know IADS postures, capabilities, and activity levels? Do you also want to know operational plans? Readiness reports?

All I'm saying is that it's a lot of important stuff and people who go to the effort of analzying it are unlikely to make it publically available.

What you're asking for is military geostrategic analysis. People with PhDs do that and command consultancy fees for it or write books. By the time it gets to people like you and me, it's old and watered down or generalized into stuff you can read on Wikipedia or the CIA World Factbook.

I think your best bet might be to follow the works and musings of geopolitical strategists like Thomas P. M. Barnett, formerly of Wikistrat, or George Friedman, formerly of Stratfor. Actually, subscribing to consultancies like Wikistrat or Stratfor or their ilk would probably be your best-best bet but that's probably dumb expensive to the point where only institutional entities can afford it.

There are also blogs and minor publications like Blogs of War and Small Wars Journal. Moreover there are policy research organizations like the Institute for the Study of War and the Center for a New American Security and others. But again, everything you're getting is always someone's opinion on quantitative, qualitative and uncertain knowledge and unverifiable facts. And nobody's focus, as far as I know, is to specifically keep track of and publicly post and objective report on the military strength of any given country or group of countries.

That's full time jobs for many highly qualified people, trying to expose things that are secretive, embarrassing, illegal or otherwise hard to pin down.

looks heavy

Looks super neat. I hope it catches on but gas operated pistols haven't so far, so...

Before I knew it was gas operated, I imagined it being some sort of on-its-head tilting action, like your typical short-recoil pistol action but turned upside down somehow so that the rear of the barrel is pivoted up instead of down during unlocking.

>>107499
I wonder if they could use a rotating barrel system like the Beretta PX4.

I shot a PX4 and found it unremarkable. Pretty much identical to any other polymer frame hammer fired gun.

>>107499

Plenty of options for the action, but it's a testament to Browning's prowess that most guns use a derivative of his system. From delayed blowback like the Avenger was (https://www.m1911.org/hogueavenger.htm) to the roller locked Korth PRS (https://kortharms.com/de/pistol-prs-5.html), there were plenty of options for fixed barrels.
I find it odd that they'd go for gas operated, but I'm curious about it anyway.

>>107500
>I wonder if they could use a rotating barrel system like the Beretta PX4

It's a fixed barrel. A rotating barrel would ruin that idea.

>>107500

I have never had a good experience with the PX4. I played with one that when you engaged the safety, half the time the hammer did not decock (although the concept of carrying a cocked and locked Beretta was amusing). The last time I fired one (about 3 months ago) I had several stoppages, mainly failure to extract.

bump stocks suck
get a binary trigger instead

Banned in my state, WA

>>107425
Binary triggers also suck and are in fact dangerous

Full auto in general has limited application, any gimped form of it is of no use.

>>107428
>Full auto in general has limited application, any gimped form of it is of no use.
Thats the sour grapes talking kid

i think they just banned full semi auto

>>107362
Jesus, that's so much better than everything else.

>>107367

>>107372
longbois btfo in ballistics but mid gas is still king

>>107351
While this is nothing to scoff at it bums me out a bit in comparison to the TSX. I wonder which soft point was used and whether it was bonded or not. I was going to warmly load up a few hundred of my pulled 62 grain federal fusions for my 10.5 inch braced pistol I keep handy in my truck, but if these are something great like a nosler partition vs a cheapo cup and core I'm afraid the performance out of my barrel length might be mediocre if that's as deep as a 14.5 inch could drive it.

Dat TSX though. Jesusth. I wish I could get a good source for them. I was able to get a couple thousand piece commercial bags of the 145 grain LRX's for my .280 AI for like 20 cents per boolit Hopefully some .224 diameter shows up on the market as such.

Cool pictures are one thing, interpreting the data is another.

DocGKR will even admit, not every round performed the same way. M855 for example is notorious for inconsistency with fragmentation.

Also be sure to assess your own requirements and needs based on what you think you'll need.
IE: "NONE of the fragmenting 5.56 mm OTM bullets, even the heavy 75 - 100 gr loads, offer acceptable performance through automobile windshield glass. Contrary to what many believe, M193 & M855 FMJ are not very good against glass; the best military 5.56 mm load against glass is 52 gr M995 AP, followed by the 62 gr Mk318 Mod0 OTM and 70 gr Optimal "brown tip" OTM."

>>107367

Most are tested down to 10.4" at a minimum, sometimes shorter like 8.9".