|
Dannywilson posted:I find myself liking the Mini-14 more and more as I like the M1 carbine more and more. Especially when they're in these fed ordinance underfolder stocks: ugh. I hate those stocks. They are completely retarded. You get zero good cheekweld and the crappy buttplate makes even .30 carbine feel a bit unpleasant if you're just wearing a t-shirt or some other thin garment. It's doubly terrible when compared to the USGI side folding stock. That has a nice leather cheakrest that actually gives a functional cheek weld, has a full buttplate that feels just the same as the buttplate on a normal carbine stock, and the OAL whith it closed is basically the same as the Fed. Ord. crap stock. Really, if you want a collapsible carbine stock, even for a post-war repro, get a repro USGI. They're just a lot nicer.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 01:42 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 18:29 |
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Really, if you want a collapsible carbine stock, even for a post-war repro, get a repro USGI. They're just a lot nicer. I didn't know they made USGI repro stocks for the Mini-14, my roomie has one of the nice repros for his M1 carbine, and I'd much rather have one of those when I finally buy a mini-14.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 02:46 |
|
|
infrared35 posted:But... direct impingement! And the timeless design of the M1/M1A! Obviously the fact that AR-15s poo poo where they eat has driven many to other platforms, but the ubiquity of the AR platform and its paraphenelia has polluted other designs.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 02:52 |
|
|
Dannywilson posted:I didn't know they made USGI repro stocks for the Mini-14, my roomie has one of the nice repros for his M1 carbine, and I'd much rather have one of those when I finally buy a mini-14.  ignore me. For some reason I thought that picture was one of those godawful underfolder M1 carbine stocks. I'm just a bit retarded tonight.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 06:12 |
|
|
 
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 07:03 |
|
|
Oh god, I threw up in my mouth a little bit. 
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 07:08 |
|
"
|
That seems like a worthwhile use of a $200 stamp.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 07:15 |
|
|
DAVE!!!(c)(tm) posted:Oh Christ  That can't be legal, as short as the barrel is on that thing.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 09:13 |
|
|
No, it's a 16" Saiga barrel, so it's legal (not sure about the stock). Unless the dude put in the effort to take the stock front sight and sleeve off, cut the barrel, and then put it back on. If so, then 
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 09:27 |
|
|
MOM MOM LOOK WHAT I MADE IN WOODSHOP ISNT IT PRETTY I WANT TO PUT IT ON A GUN OK MOM MOM MOMMY. Why would you put that much work into an unconverted Saiga? The trigger pretty lovely as is. Edit: VVVV Hey now, wood glue and 10c nails are pretty tough 
I like turtles fucked around with this message at Nov 15, 2009 around 09:36 |
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 09:31 |
|
|
That stock is seriously hilarious. I wonder how he has the parts attached to each other. I want to see the expression on his face when the whole thing just crumbles one day.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 09:34 |
|
|
The gun rack I made in first year wood shop looked better than that, and that gun rack was a travesty, an insult to the wood from which it was made.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 13:08 |
|
|
infrared35 posted:The
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 16:18 |
|
|
 That's right, it's a Kel-Tec PLR-16 SBR 
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 17:18 |
|
|
kuffs posted:
If they made that with a sidefolding stock, that would own
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 17:24 |
|
|
that Kel-Tec is so wrong even my dog twisted her head in a wtf pose
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 17:25 |
|
|
kuffs posted:
Dear lord, it looks like a rifle with a compulsive eating disorder.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 18:10 |
|
|
kuffs posted:Why god? Why? Are you there god? I guess not.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 18:16 |
|
|
kuffs posted:
gently caress me... did someone take a $1,000 holo-sight, spray paint it, and then put it on an AirSoft? 
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 18:43 |
|
|
Oh no, it is real. It is real. http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/Y...22403;start=all
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 19:24 |
|
|
oddspelling posted:gently caress me... did someone take a $1,000 holo-sight, spray paint it, and then put it on an AirSoft? Edit: besides the EOLAD 
Pitch fucked around with this message at Nov 15, 2009 around 19:46 |
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 19:41 |
|
|
Someone tell me why I should hate that, beyond the fact that its a Kel-tec? Sure the bipod is kinda  but the rest of the accessories are par for the course in EBR land.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 19:45 |
|
|
Yeah, as far as keltec owners go that was pretty tasteful.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 20:05 |
|
|
Monomer posted:I categorically disavow all knowledge and submit that you, sir, are part of the vast spice rack conspiracy under whose boots we toil.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 20:18 |
|
|
Propagandalf posted:Someone tell me why I should hate that, beyond the fact that its a Kel-tec? Sure the bipod is kinda Because this is the original gun.  Then again, it could be the PLR-16 was tactiLOL to begin with and the owner is just restoring the gun to the PLR-16's predecessor's original rifle format. I almost thought it was this and thought it defeated the purpose of having a rifle that could folddown for storage.
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 20:28 |
|
|
infrared35 posted:I categorically disavow all knowledge and submit that you, sir, are part of the vast spice rack conspiracy under whose boots we toil. My mom was a high school art teacher, and without fail each year during the pottery phase, kids would sneak 
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 20:29 |
|
|
oddspelling posted:gently caress me... did someone take a $1,000 holo-sight, spray paint it, and then put it on an AirSoft? what are you trying to say here? efb
|
| # ? Nov 15, 2009 21:44 |
|
|
Propagandalf posted:Someone tell me why I should hate that, beyond the fact that its a Kel-tec? Sure the bipod is kinda Because it's a tax stamped SBR with a 6000 round operational life. Unless it's in Canada, then, whatever.
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 00:30 |
|
|
I wish that people would stop throwing around '6000 round operational life' as if it were some god-enforced set in stone thing. Like the gun will crumble into dust upon firing its 6000th round. A company who makes guns which may vary in quality is clearly covering its rear end when it says that all of its guns have at least a six thousand round lifespan. The statement is rather meaningless since an RFB which retails for over a thousand dollars will probably have a rather long service life while one of their pocket pistols of cheaper construction may start to fail at 6000 (or even before if some TFR member's experiences are any indication). Saying that the low end of operational life of their diverse product line is 6000 rounds doesn't mean that all of their products are poo poo, just some of them . I don't mean to be a Kel-Tec apologist since I don't own any of their guns and don't plan to, but it's become almost cliche to respond with 'lol 6000 rounds' anytime anyone posts any Kel-Tec product. Unrelated pic 
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 00:49 |
|
|
omgLerkHat! posted:The statement is rather meaningless since an RFB which retails for over a thousand dollars will probably have a rather long service life while one of their pocket pistols of cheaper construction may start to fail at 6000 (or even before if some TFR member's experiences are any indication).
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 00:50 |
|
|
omgLerkHat! posted:Unrelated pic It's like a benchrester said "Hey, I can make the most ludicrously oversized weapon I can think of that will require an olympic powerlifter to carry to the firing line- better make it on a semiauto bullpup platform with a crappy bipod- for portability and ease of use "
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:07 |
|
|
Pitch posted:If TFR members' experiences are any indication, an RFB will be lucky to have any service life. He had the known early-run problems with the ejection tube which were corrected in subsequent revisions?
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:12 |
|
|
RU 187 261 LIB posted:He had the known early-run problems with the ejection tube which were corrected in subsequent revisions? Still doesn't feel like a $1,000+ quality build or function for me. If they could get it down to ~$700, especially with some of the smaller/cheaper calibers, I'd be willing to put up with the build quality of the furniture, cycling, getting over the chute issue I had at first, etc. But at $1500-$2000, which is what it is currently going for? Not so much.
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:19 |
|
|
RU 187 261 LIB posted:He had the known early-run problems with the ejection tube which were corrected in subsequent revisions?
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:20 |
|
|
Pitch posted:Kel-Tec shipped a rifle with a design flaw rendering it totally nonfunctional despite some fifteen years spent "perfecting" the system. Weren't they having trouble with outside suppliers when they were trying to ramp up production?
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:29 |
|
|
omgLerkHat! posted:I wish that people would stop throwing around '6000 round operational life' as if it were some god-enforced set in stone thing. Like the gun will crumble into dust upon firing its 6000th round. I tend to believe the manufacturer who builds the gun. I would think they would know better than anyone else. omgLerkHat! posted:A company who makes guns which may vary in quality is clearly covering its rear end when it says that all of its guns have at least a six thousand round lifespan. The phrase, 'at least' doesn't appear in their statement. omgLerkHat! posted:The statement is rather meaningless since an RFB which retails for over a thousand dollars will probably have a rather long service life while one of their pocket pistols of cheaper construction may start to fail at 6000 (or even before if some TFR member's experiences are any indication). Probably? I don't know of anyone that has ran 6,000 rounds through it yet. I like how you make guesses to support your position. omgLerkHat! posted:Saying that the low end of operational life of their diverse product line is 6000 rounds doesn't mean that all of their products are poo poo, just some of them Yes, we should not take the manufacturer's word at face value when discussing the guns they build. If they really didn't believe this figure, they wouldn't leave the statement up on their website for the world to see. The Automator fucked around with this message at Nov 16, 2009 around 01:38 |
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:35 |
|
|
 Gotta use the threaded barrel for something, I guess.
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:39 |
|
|
 Do you not understand what 'or more' means or something?
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:44 |
|
|
omgLerkHat! posted:
Sure, but by putting a low-ball figure like 6000 to start with, they're making it sound like that's all you should realistically expect. Most government acceptance tests require a minimum of ten thousand rounds, and most mainstream manufacturers speculate that the minimum service life of their weapons is over twenty thousand rounds. There are handguns out there that have been regularly subjected to a lot more than that without breaking down (Beretta, SIG, Glock, and HK come immediately to mind)
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:48 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 18:29 |
|
|
I think the whole 6,000 round thing is sort of like 100K miles on a car.
|
| # ? Nov 16, 2009 01:51 |
|
