NationStates

Premislyd wrote:

The Archangel Conglomerate wrote:Right, I got that far.

What confuses me is the necessity, or even logic, behind the creation of said round. It seems a rather silly combination of the 7.92mm Mauser and 7.62mmR, which promises none of the benefits of either.

Huh? 7.62x54mmR has a 7.92 mm bullet.

Bezombia wrote:

Premislyd wrote:
Huh? 7.62x54mmR has a 7.92 mm bullet.

But a 7.62mm bore.

Nine times out of ten, cartridges are not measured at the bullet.

The Archangel Conglomerate wrote:

Aqizithiuda wrote:16.8 is what the SP5 projectile weighs.

I can manage around 16.5g with a longer projectile, but I'm not sure it'll fit properly. I'll need to redo the powly and look into it.

And futr armour stronk.

Indeed.

Can I assume that futr 2015 propellants can boost said velocity to 1.3km/s or greater?

Aqizithiuda wrote:And because my phone hates quoting more than one person, it's the 4.6mm that's been pushed to it's limits, not the 5.7mm.

Tule wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:
Disappoint implies you had hope for such a novelty piece of crappe.

Or that it performed even worse than I thought.

3 inches of petal penetration is pathetic.

Puzikas wrote:

Aqizithiuda wrote:And because my phone hates quoting more than one person, it's the 4.6mm that's been pushed to it's limits, not the 5.7mm.

This on both accounts.

I love my droid, but y u no good at forum typing.

And also, standard "I hate 4.6" stuff here.

Tule wrote:
Or that it performed even worse than I thought.

3 inches of petal penetration is pathetic.

Based on the manufacturing test, its shocking.

Based on real world expectations, its not very shocking. Its actually outright funny. I must admit however, they did have me fooled at first, along with a number of people.

This isn't stopping me from buying some and doing a test on it against some metal and vests and such though.
You know, if anyone wants to see that.

Premislyd wrote:

Puzikas wrote:I love my droid, but y u no good at forum typing./quote]

Galaxy Note 3

*nods*

Bezombia wrote:

Premislyd wrote:

not sure if intentionally ironic
or unintentionally ironic

The Republic of Lanos wrote:

Bezombia wrote:
not sure if intentionally ironic
or unintentionally ironic

This has to do with guns...how?

I got a question. How early could a M16 be used with a gas piston system?

Black Hand wrote:

The Republic of Lanos wrote:This has to do with guns...how?

I got a question. How early could a M16 be used with a gas piston system?

sorta

Bezombia wrote:

Black Hand wrote:sorta

One year earlier!

Black Hand wrote:

Bezombia wrote:
One year earlier!

forgot that.

am I the only one surprised that the Stoner 63 isn't used by any of the regulars? it's modularity was way ahead of it's time and it's the ultimate hipster rifle

Bezombia wrote:

Black Hand wrote:forgot that.

am I the only one surprised that the Stoner 63 isn't used by any of the regulars? it's modularity was way ahead of it's time and it's the ultimate hipster rifle

In assault rifle form, it weighed ten pounds.

That's completely unacceptable for a modern rifle.

Bezombia wrote:

Black Hand wrote:forgot that.

am I the only one surprised that the Stoner 63 isn't used by any of the regulars? it's modularity was way ahead of it's time and it's the ultimate hipster rifle

In assault rifle form, it weighed ten pounds.

That's completely unacceptable for a modern rifle.

The Republic of Lanos wrote:The M14 still exists with its 10 lbs of American-made "FUCK YEAH!" in multiple roles.

The Republic of Lanos wrote:

Bezombia wrote:
In assault rifle form, it weighed ten pounds.

That's completely unacceptable for a modern rifle.

The M14 still exists with its 10 lbs of American-made "FUCK YEAH!" in multiple roles.

Black Hand wrote:

Bezombia wrote:
In assault rifle form, it weighed ten pounds.

That's completely unacceptable for a modern rifle.

where it says AR that's automatic rifle as in IAR rifle form weighed less than 8

Bezombia wrote:

The Republic of Lanos wrote:The M14 still exists with its 10 lbs of American-made "FUCK YEAH!" in multiple roles.

The M14 fires a full power rifle cartridge. The Stoner 63 fires 5.56x45 NATO. There's no reason for it to be that heavy.

The Republic of Lanos wrote:

Bezombia wrote:
The M14 fires a full power rifle cartridge. The Stoner 63 fires 5.56x45 NATO. There's no reason for it to be that heavy.

What if I told you Stoner 63 was used be US special forces, namely the SEALs, in Vietnam and up until the M249 came into service in the 1980s?

Bezombia wrote:

The Republic of Lanos wrote:What if I told you Stoner 63 was used be US special forces, namely the SEALs, in Vietnam and up until the M249 came into service in the 1980s?

If it was replaced by the M249, it clearly isn't a suitable replacement for the M16.


I'm not saying it's a bad weapon. I'm saying it's a bad idea to issue it as your main rifle.

Bezombia wrote:

Black Hand wrote:where it says AR that's automatic rifle as in IAR rifle form weighed less than 8

Still almost four pounds heavier than the AR-15.

7.18 lb (3.26 kg) (unloaded)
8.79 lb (4.0 kg) (loaded)

Puzikas wrote:You clearly don't know about the baby bald eagle built into each one.

Bezombia wrote:

Black Hand wrote:where it says AR that's automatic rifle as in IAR rifle form weighed less than 8

Still almost four pounds heavier than the AR-15.

Puzikas wrote:You clearly don't know about the baby bald eagle built into each one.