Main Military Weapon of Your Country: Mk. VI

[Vareiln]

Ah. I thought with the short barrel he was going with something for tank crews and whatnot. In which case PDWs probably would have worked better.
But yeah. If he's going for a service rifle with compactness, bullpup is the way to go.

If I read his post right, it's a general-purpose weapon.

Odd question. Could you use a .32 pistol round give it a bit more powder and a necked casein. Could you use it as a lightweight AR Round?

There's no reason to, because the bullet won't be as aerodynamic as a rifle round and there are already a lot of .30 caliber rifle rounds.

Then you were correct, and I was mistaken.

[Nua Corda]

Odd question. Could you use a .32 pistol round give it a bit more powder and a necked casein. Could you use it as a lightweight AR Round?

Could you? Yes. Would you want to? No. 7mm AR round only AR round.

[Spreewerke]

Converting an AK to a legal-fully-automatic weapon would require a new bolt carrier made for FA fire (unless you're okay with non-patterned fire rates) and a full-auto sear which can be found for $20.00. They're a Class II conversion item, though, so I think they are taxed with the $200 stamp. Not sure. If not, then you'd just have to register your AK as a post-dealer sample and destroy the full-auto receiver later or something. I really don't know.

As for an illegal conversion, I'm sure one could find a way to do it relatively easily. Just make sure you have the bolt-carrier with the sear retarder to prevent out-of-battery fire. I've looked at my sear plenty of times when disassembling, and I think it'd be possible to remove part of the semi-automatic sear's rear hook to where it didn't catch with the trigger pulled, but did upon release. I don't want to talk about it anymore, though, and I won't be providing photographs. I don't want any dogs to get shot, and I honestly don't feel too horribly comfortable discussing a modification like this on the intertubes.

Don't worry; I don't own any firearms anyway. I was just curious, since it sounded like you could basically drill a hole and replace a part then have a full-auto AK. I doubt I'll ever illegally convert a firearm to fire full-auto because I'm not particularly interested in that function; outside combat it'd just be for fun on a range, and I think I'd have more fun trying to nail targets from 400+m.

I probably won't ever own a fully-automatic anything simply because I cannot justify the price. $20,000 for a pre-'86 AK? No thanks. If I want to dump 30 rounds in seconds inaccurately, I'll just bumpfire and start inbreeding. Until then, I'm going to stick with aimed, semi-automatic fire that not only is more effective accuracy-wise, but wastes far less ammunition.

If ever we're allowed to own current-production full-autos without being a Class III dealer, however... AKs will drop down to around $350 fully-automatic (for old models) as current post-'86 dealer samples are around $400-450. Once everyone is able to legally own one from any production year, prices are going to drop as sales go upwards.

Doubt that day'll come, though, so I'm perfectly fine with semi-automatic. No complaints, really. As a civilian, I consider FA to more or less be for the cool factor. Heck, I can think of two people right now (who are actually getting married to one another, interestingly enough) who went through basic training either last year or the year before for the Army: never once flipped on the giggle switch. All live-fire training was done semi-automatic only.

[Vareiln]

Odd question. Could you use a .32 pistol round give it a bit more powder and a necked casein. Could you use it as a lightweight AR Round?

Could you? Yes. Would you want to? No. 7mm AR round only AR round.

I'm actually surprised that nobody advocates this round. Ever.

[Spreewerke]

Could you? Yes. Would you want to? No. 7mm AR round only AR round.

I'm actually surprised that nobody advocates this round. Ever.

Sounds like it sucks. That might be why.

[Vareiln]

I'm actually surprised that nobody advocates this round. Ever.

Sounds like it sucks. That might be why.

It sounds like a better .243, which I've shot once, and did pretty good for a varmint round.

[Wallops Island]

The Wallops Island main weapon is the Mk.18, which is simply a modified M4 so it has a shorter barrel, at about 10 inches. This allows it to be used in tight spots, but it still packs the same punch as an M4

5.56 NATO needs a longish barrel in order to perform properly. The M4 has already come under a lot of fire for being too short, with a (IIRC) 14.5 inch barrel. With a 10 inch, you would have even more problems, unless you used 6.8 SPC rather than 5.56. Alternately, a bullpup is nice.

Yes, IF t was a standard rifle. The long barrel stabilizes the round more, so it travels straighter. In a CQB area that this is intended for, you dont need that long range accuracy. This is geared towards special operations forces, and IRL its used mostly by the Coast Guard

[Nua Corda]

Could you? Yes. Would you want to? No. 7mm AR round only AR round.

I'm actually surprised that nobody advocates this round. Ever.

Probably because it's an intermediate that's longer than a full sized rifle round. Plus, since it appears to be necked down 7mm Mauser, and 7mm > all...

[Spreewerke]

Sounds like it sucks. That might be why.

It sounds like a better .243, which I've shot once, and did pretty good for a varmint round.

Answer bolded.

[Spreewerke]

5.56 NATO needs a longish barrel in order to perform properly. The M4 has already come under a lot of fire for being too short, with a (IIRC) 14.5 inch barrel. With a 10 inch, you would have even more problems, unless you used 6.8 SPC rather than 5.56. Alternately, a bullpup is nice.

Yes, IF t was a standard rifle. The long barrel stabilizes the round more, so it travels straighter. In a CQB area that this is intended for, you dont need that long range accuracy. This is geared towards special operations forces, and IRL its used mostly by the Coast Guard

Barrel length does not effect accuracy or stabilization.

[Vareiln]

Wow. Second day on a new forum and I'm already convinced out of ever advocating a round that I used to advocate quite a bit.

[Spreewerke]

Wow. Second day on a new forum and I'm already convinced out of ever advocating a round that I used to advocate quite a bit.

7.62x39mm is best intermediate!

/bias

[Indeos]

If I read his post right, it's a general-purpose weapon.



There's no reason to, because the bullet won't be as aerodynamic as a rifle round and there are already a lot of .30 caliber rifle rounds.

Then you were correct, and I was mistaken.

There was supposed to be more to that but I forgot what I was going to say now. So try not to take that post as an indication of my superior attitude.

Don't worry; I don't own any firearms anyway. I was just curious, since it sounded like you could basically drill a hole and replace a part then have a full-auto AK. I doubt I'll ever illegally convert a firearm to fire full-auto because I'm not particularly interested in that function; outside combat it'd just be for fun on a range, and I think I'd have more fun trying to nail targets from 400+m.

I probably won't ever own a fully-automatic anything simply because I cannot justify the price. $20,000 for a pre-'86 AK? No thanks. If I want to dump 30 rounds in seconds inaccurately, I'll just bumpfire and start inbreeding. Until then, I'm going to stick with aimed, semi-automatic fire that not only is more effective accuracy-wise, but wastes far less ammunition.

If ever we're allowed to own current-production full-autos without being a Class III dealer, however... AKs will drop down to around $350 fully-automatic (for old models) as current post-'86 dealer samples are around $400-450. Once everyone is able to legally own one from any production year, prices are going to drop as sales go upwards.

Doubt that day'll come, though, so I'm perfectly fine with semi-automatic. No complaints, really. As a civilian, I consider FA to more or less be for the cool factor. Heck, I can think of two people right now (who are actually getting married to one another, interestingly enough) who went through basic training either last year or the year before for the Army: never once flipped on the giggle switch. All live-fire training was done semi-automatic only.

My dad had the same experience in the Coast Guard; the only time he used FA was with mounted MGs or a few times when they were just having fun. (Like when they had to get rid of .45 ammo for some reason [I think it was because of the switch to the 9mm pistol], and he and the guy he was stationed with just pounded through magazines at the range, then did some "practice" with M16s.) Other than that, all training and qualification was done with semi-auto.

Like I said, the only use I can think of for FA in a civilian weapon is fun at the range.

5.56 NATO needs a longish barrel in order to perform properly. The M4 has already come under a lot of fire for being too short, with a (IIRC) 14.5 inch barrel. With a 10 inch, you would have even more problems, unless you used 6.8 SPC rather than 5.56. Alternately, a bullpup is nice.

Yes, IF t was a standard rifle. The long barrel stabilizes the round more, so it travels straighter. In a CQB area that this is intended for, you dont need that long range accuracy. This is geared towards special operations forces, and IRL its used mostly by the Coast Guard

The problem is lethality, not accuracy; the 5.56 NATO isn't consistently lethal out of short barrels because it isn't traveling as fast.

Yes, IF t was a standard rifle. The long barrel stabilizes the round more, so it travels straighter. In a CQB area that this is intended for, you dont need that long range accuracy. This is geared towards special operations forces, and IRL its used mostly by the Coast Guard

Barrel length does not effect accuracy or stabilization.

Why do DMR variants have longer barrels, and snipers just generally long barrels, if that's the case?

[Vareiln]

Wow. Second day on a new forum and I'm already convinced out of ever advocating a round that I used to advocate quite a bit.

7.62x39mm is best intermediate!

/bias

Which variant? Isn't there that Yugoslavian variant that's far superior to the M43 one?

[Indeos]

7.62x39mm is best intermediate!

/bias

Which variant? Isn't there that Yugoslavian variant that's far superior to the M43 one?

M67 is the good one.

For the record, 6mm Winchester doesn't sound bad.

[Vareiln]

Which variant? Isn't there that Yugoslavian variant that's far superior to the M43 one?

M67 is the good one.

For the record, 6mm Winchester doesn't sound bad.

Perhaps it would make a good DMR round...

[Nua Corda]

5.56 NATO needs a longish barrel in order to perform properly. The M4 has already come under a lot of fire for being too short, with a (IIRC) 14.5 inch barrel. With a 10 inch, you would have even more problems, unless you used 6.8 SPC rather than 5.56. Alternately, a bullpup is nice.

Yes, IF t was a standard rifle. The long barrel stabilizes the round more, so it travels straighter. In a CQB area that this is intended for, you dont need that long range accuracy. This is geared towards special operations forces, and IRL its used mostly by the Coast Guard

You said it was your main weapon. This implies standardization. And actually it's more about burning up all the powder to maximize gas production.

Anyhow, this:


Clicky for fullview

Is roughly the same length as what you're discribing, but has a longer barrel then an M4. Properly configured, it also has G36 PMAGs and 7x40mm Optimum Round.

[Spreewerke]

Barrel length does not effect accuracy or stabilization.

Why do DMR variants have longer barrels, and snipers just generally long barrels, if that's the case?

A longer barrel gives the powder more room to burn in behind the projectile before it leaves the barrel. This results in an increase in velocity. Increased velocity means less bullet arc over a given distance. Marksmen and snipers use this increased velocity to have both less bullet arc (requiring less adjustments over longer ranges) and it increases the range of the projectile due to its arc being less substantial.

TL;DR: Longer barrels "shoot flatter" and farther than their shorter-barreled counterparts.

[Spreewerke]

M67 is the good one.

For the record, 6mm Winchester doesn't sound bad.

Perhaps it would make a good DMR round...

Iraqis are already fielding it as a DMR via the Tabuk RPK variant. It's really only effective out to 400m tops on a very good day. I wouldn't consider it a very good DMR cartridge.

If you were referring to the 6mm Win. round, however, I don't know what to tell you.

[Nua Corda]

Also, increased velocity tends to cause more wounding potential, and barrier penetration.

[Indeos]

M67 is the good one.

For the record, 6mm Winchester doesn't sound bad.

Perhaps it would make a good DMR round...

I derped. Should've been Remington. Anyway, IMO it has a bit too little energy for that; it would probably be a decent high-power intermediate, though. It'd have to go in a bullpup otherwise length may be an issue, and I'm not sure that there aren't better alternatives.

Why do DMR variants have longer barrels, and snipers just generally long barrels, if that's the case?

A longer barrel gives the powder more room to burn in behind the projectile before it leaves the barrel. This results in an increase in velocity. Increased velocity means less bullet arc over a given distance. Marksmen and snipers use this increased velocity to have both less bullet arc (requiring less adjustments over longer ranges) and it increases the range of the projectile due to its arc being less substantial.

TL;DR: Longer barrels "shoot flatter" and farther than their shorter-barreled counterparts.

I'd call that an accuracy thing because it's about the bullet going where you're aiming. It's not a precision thing, though, because it won't change how consistently it does that.

[Vareiln]

Perhaps it would make a good DMR round...

Iraqis are already fielding it as a DMR via the Tabuk RPK variant. It's really only effective out to 400m tops on a very good day. I wouldn't consider it a very good DMR cartridge.

If you were referring to the 6mm Win. round, however, I don't know what to tell you.

I was referring to 6mm, not that commie cartridge.

[Vareiln]

Also, increased velocity tends to cause more wounding potential, and barrier penetration.

Longer barrels are just better, naturally.

[Indeos]

Also, increased velocity tends to cause more wounding potential, and barrier penetration.

Longer barrels are just better, naturally.

To a point; there'll eventually be a point where the barrel slows the round down.

[Spreewerke]

The M16A2 and M4 Carbine (both used by the Army) are more or less the same in terms of accuracy: around 1.0MOA.

Barrels differ by 5.5" if I remember correctly, however.

MEANWHILE, IN CHART:


Same accuracy, different drop rates.