foghorn posted:

That's a 1943 M1 carbine under all that crap.

Asbestos posted:

why the gently caress? Tell me the front sight was removed non-destructively. If you wanted to feel guilt and shame your whole life converting to Catholicism would have been cheaper and less offensive.

Uncle Caveman posted:

Tell me that's at least an Ultimak rail and not some handguard-mounted backalley abortion.

foghorn posted:

sky shark posted:

Needs more laser & folding stock & flashlight

foghorn posted:

Negative on the folding stock. NY assault weapons ban says I can only have one fun feature on my rifle, add anything else and it's illegal. I even had to replace the front barrel band to remove the bayonet mount feature to get the pistol grip.

Once I move to PA, though, folding stock AND bayo mount are mine.

Pretty Little Rainbow posted:

Whats more awkward than reloading a bullpup?

Reloading a bullpup with a stripper clip!

http://sgworks.com/

Young Freud posted:

And it doesn't look like they don't make that for the clip-fed SKS-M, which you'd think that would be a given.

Pretty Little Rainbow posted:

Whats more awkward than reloading a bullpup?

Reloading a bullpup with a stripper clip!

http://sgworks.com/

TenementFunster posted:

SKS-M is magazine-fed. every SKS is magazine-fed

Young Freud posted:

Whoops, look like I violated the TFR's sacred rule, calling box magazines "clips".

Tmavomodry posted:

Wow! Check out those lightening fast... stripper fed magazine charges.

ddr3gamer posted:

What is with the way he's firing it in the last 2? Is this some crazy standard that I am unaware of?

ddr3gamer posted:

What is with the way he's firing it in the last 2? Is this some crazy standard that I am unaware of?

Young Freud posted:

Whoops, look like I violated the TFR's sacred rule, calling box magazines "clips". The SKS-M is the removable box magazine version.

Pretty Little Rainbow posted:

Whats more awkward than reloading a bullpup?

Reloading a bullpup with a stripper clip!

http://sgworks.com/

SadWhaleFamily posted:

When you're a HIGH SPEED, LOW DRAG OPERATOR and it's time to GO LOUD there's no time to keep your goddamn finger off the trigger when you're reloading or running stupidly.

ddr3gamer posted:

http://springfield-armory.primediao...m/SPstory28.php

Ron Mexico posted:

Looks cool to me.

ddr3gamer posted:

http://springfield-armory.primediao...m/SPstory28.php

ddr3gamer posted:

I don't disagree in the slightest, as the rifle comes with that many rails. However, I feel that the story that goes along with it gives it more tacticlol value, as they are calling an updated M14 a good CQB weapon. Though I wouldn't mind having it myself

The Automator posted:

What makes it a bad CQB weapon?

The Automator posted:

What makes it a bad CQB weapon?

Medsmokah posted:

All I can think of would be that it is comes in .308. The extra firepower is nice but I think the recoil might be a bit much. I never fired an FA .308 just .45 before so maybe someone who has can chime in on this.

Cyrano4747 posted:

That looks like an airsofter threw it together using a Cheaper Than Dirt catalog.

The Automator posted:

gently caress you guys, I wanted 'ddr3gamer' to answer that

Cyrano just had to go gently caress it all up with logic and such.

Also, I didn't think full auto .308 out of a converted HK91 was that bad. I could control it in short bursts pretty easily.

Cyrano4747 posted:

What makes it - especially in that configuration - a good one?

A lot of an M14's weight is in its receiver, barrel, and op rod, so it's going to be fairly heavy. The stock on it heavy as well, so putting the pistol grip and M4 style stock on probably helps in that department, but the wooden one also balances the rifle, so that thing is going to be really front heavy.

The gun in the picture has both a red dot and a magnifier on it, and it doesn't look like the magnifier is on either a QD mount or a flip to side mount. So, you're stuck with medium magnification on a gun that's hypothetically being used at room clearing distances. Also, what the gently caress is up with the chin weld that you'd have when using the magnifier? Is the magnifier even lined up on the red dot? It looks like it's about 1cm higher than the optic it's supposed to be magnifying.

It still has the M14 rear sight on it, and a low profile front sight, but it looks like all that poo poo on the rail prevents either from being used. If you're going to go balls to the wall on "updating" the m14 why not remove the irons and go with a rail mounted, spring loaded BUIS setup like on an AR?

The forward grip is mounted way too far back. Also, given that the M14 has a rock-n-lock magazine it LOOKS like it might actually get in the way of doing reloads, although I'm just eyeballing that and can't be sure. Regardless it's close enough that it could probably be an issue if it was actually being used in a CQB situation and not for range fuckery.

That flashlight needs to be forward as well, but I suspect that has more to do with the VFG placement. As it stands you're going to have a huge as gently caress shadow/void at the top because of the six inches of rail and barrel blocking off the light.

Someone could probably made a M14 into a decent CQB weapon. We'll leave the "do you need 7.62 nato for room clearing" argument somewhere else, but I'd believe it could be done and done well.

That looks like an airsofter threw it together using a Cheaper Than Dirt catalog.


I've fired a FA ~.308 (foreign moon caliber, but equivalent in size/recoil to 7.62NATO) from a gun that was cut down to be carbine length before. The fireball was hilarious and blinding and on FA it was utterly uncontrollable. The rise was nuts and I was happy to keep the shots out of the walls and roof of the indoor range I was on. My paper bad guy had holes in him, but the backstop above and behind him had more.

edit: oh yeah, and that gun was also front heavy as hell and a real pain in the balls to maneuver. It was great as a party favor, but claiming it would be a "good CQB gun" would be utter BS.

Cyrano4747 posted:

I've shot an FA G3 before and yeah, it was a bit more controllable. I'm guessing it has something to do with the extra barrel/handguard mass?

Either way, coming out of something about as long as that M1A it was a royal bitch.

Also, check your PMs in 30 secs automator.

edit: bah, no Plat? Really?

ph4lcon posted:

You're full of poo poo. Stick with old guns.

Cyrano4747 posted:

We'll leave the "do you need 7.62 nato for room clearing" argument somewhere else, but I'd believe it could be done and done well.

infrared35 posted:

Do you want to hit an attacker with a sledge hammer or an ice pick?

Cyrano4747 posted:

How am I full of poo poo? Please enlighten me.

It seems everything I pointed out there would make that rifle less than ideal, especially when compared to other stuff that's already out there.

ph4lcon posted:

Your magnifier is a night vision monocle.
The VFG will not impede the reload process, and if it does I have a hunch that it can be moved.

I know for a fact that some AF PJs use the SAGE stock on some of their M14s, which is similar. I think I'll let the people that are paid to be badass for a living decide how to outfit their M14s, and leave the rest to the history majors.

And dont you ever insinuate that an m14 with a troy stock, aimpoint, NV, and surefire vfg, is to be considered airsoft. Stick with what you know.

Cyrano4747 posted:

I still stand by that thing being front heavy as hell, especially with that stock vs a SAGE. As I recall those have a much beefier back end that probably balances the gun.

quote:

Ultimate CQB Rifle-It's Sub-MOA Accurate and Bet-Your-Life Reliable!