g-man's Blog

I got plenty of ammo & guns... bring it on.

But then again Og'... Think of the deep dark interior of Alaska & BC. There are places there that haven't been seen by human eyes in eons. I think it is possible that there are undiscovered species in those areas... Bigfoot? Perhaps. Unlikely but perhaps.

$600 at Cabella's http://www.cabelas.com/spodw-1/0058399.shtml shipped straight to your house.

Yeah the liberals would never buy into this plan. Because clearly anyone who's ever served in the military MUST be mentally ill from that traumatic experience and that certainly is not the type of person you want "armed to the teeth" (as if anyone carrying an M4 is "armed to the teeth")... I mean every GI is the wounded Rambo type right? ...A bundle of raw nerves ready to explode in a post-traumatic stress disorder induced blind rage right?

I would have surreptitiously followed him home. Then returned home to collect his dog's leavings in a paper lunch sack... I then would have written a note explaining the inconsiderate nature of his actions, put it in an envelope and returned to his home after dark. Then set the sack o' crap on his door step, tacked the envelope to his door, lit the sack on fire, rung the doorbell and dashed off to watch the joviality that ensues.

Actually these build instructions yield a better result: http://www.prexis.com/sten/homebuilder/index.php?topic=76.0

Yeah something like that...

I've been hankering to do another parts kit build... I'm thinking of building a semi-auto PPS-43. I think it'd be a fun plinker and there's still plenty of inexpensive 7.62x25 commie ammo out there to use up.

Have any of you done one of these builds? Any suggestions, tips or pointers?

Doesn't that add-on rail prevent use of the iron sights?

Nope, you can look under the scope mount and still use the iron sights... It curls over the top cover but leaves enough of a gap to peek through.

I like the top cover replacement ones but have heard bad things about some other versions. The quad rail forgrip replacement looks dang cool, but not cool enough to pay $100.

Neither of those options will hold a zero. But of the two the top cover is the worst.

if anyone has any sweet pics of your tricked out or modified weapons let's see 'em.

Here's a pic of my AK:

LOL! Hey someone has to like those old Romy laminated wood foregrips so it might as well be you! Look, here's my deal with those sorts of things. My stuff works for me and clearly your stuff works for you. The only thing that really matters is that you decimate the target. (Well that and that you have enough US parts to ensure stupid 922r compliance.) So don't let them busting your chops get on your nerves.

You already have a side rail. All you need is a nice AK Weaver mount (something like this: http://www.copesdistributing.net/product_info.php?cPath=32_34&products_id=747) and you can start loading it up with accessories.

How about a Kel-Tec SU-16? I've heard nothing but good things about those.

A C-130 can only deliver one round at a time...

But only the K variants... the rest would have to go without.

Og' what a pot stirer!

"improvements in individual weapon performance in the areas of accuracy and dispersion ... reliability and durability in all environments, modularity and terminal performance."

In other words they want something that jams less and hits harder than a BB gun. Of course with the way things go... they'll end up with a stryker version of a rifle.

I wonder how it compares in price & dependability to the Saiga 410.

Yeah it's a pretty accurate gun. It does have an AK-esque bolt carrier and an AR bolt. The recoil spring is wrapped around the gas piston. The only things I'd like to see improved is the trigger and the fact that there's no direct route into the chamber to clean it. There's a full write up on it over on my blog... http://ggthoughts.blogspot.com/search/label/PLR-16...

Well you know with that gas piston in there it sure does keep the chamber end of things a HELL of a lot cleaner and easier to keep lubricated. It'd be cool if I could get a PLR in 6.8 ;-)

Now you've gone and done it Rau... Whatever shall we do? He's got his panties all in a wad and he's gonna tell Og' on you.

in my 8 years of Marine Corps infantry experience, I observed that a properly lubed M16/M4 ran extremely well, particularly when using the newer mags with green followers.

Anecdotal evidence gains you no points for debate skills. Please try again.

As I've previously mentioned, rear echelon troops have had well-documented and deadly issues with the reliability of these rifles. Those issues have already cost lives. Now, I know you are derisive of support troops and believe them unworthy of a chance at self-defense. Clearly they aren't a mighty marine and are un-knowledgeable about staking carrier keys, lubing castle nuts and color coordinating their mag followers. For that reason alone they deserve to die right? Silly me for thinking that a soldier shouldn't have to be an armorer to be able to kill the enemy. How dare I ask that they be able to engage the enemy without having to worry about periodically squirting oil in their shitty rifles in the midst of a fire fight.

In my 10 years of service I've seen plenty of jams and malfunctions but I guess that's just because I was just recon and not a know-it-all armorer/marine infantry/deity who was capable of declaring anecdote fact.

Fine. Back up your points about the AR.

You first...

Please be specific and don't confuse the caliber with the rifle.

Ah but you see there are two issues that collude to make the AR the POS that it is... First issue is the rifle's design flaws and the second is the anemic issued caliber... Fixing one without fixing the other leaves it still flawed. Kind of like a vehicle with a dead engine and no brakes... fixing one without the other is fool's folly.

Ah there I go trying to talk sense again...

LOL! Stellar debate skills again make their appearance as if on cue.

Well this discussion went from heated debate to...

It was hardly a debate... Debates generally are based on logic and this exchange was rather one sided on that front.

oh and...

That was more directed toward G-man who got snippy when I called that project "vaporware."

Huh?

gas piston

I'm done... Just tired of trying to argue common sense with someone who prefers "perfectly adequate" to "the absolute best" when it comes to arming our troops.

Sure IED's are a problem... So get our folks out of hummers and strykers and into proper IED & RPG resistant armored vehicles. Find and deploy the best IED detection and removal technology... By all means! But why stop there (especially when we spend so little on small arms when compared to other high dollar budget items like up-armoring vehicles that were never designed to be armored in the first place)?

So did you kick some ass? I would have done some serious ass kicking for a bone head stunt like that.

Armchair commando refers to not listening to the troops that are there on the ground. I've already posted word from the front; rifles are not the problem, IEDs are.

"Armchair commando" was an attempt on your part to insinuate that I know nothing and that you are some sort of unimpeachable expert. Condescension is not usually a sign of sterling character. You've posted word from one guy on the front line. I too have contacts who are serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan. You still haven't told me why, if the M4/5.56 is so perfect, is the Army Chief of Staff holding hearings to find a replacement? Sure you know some guys and I know some guys but I'm not talking about you and me and any amount of ad-hoc evidence we can gather from our limited contacts, I'm talking about the Army Chief of Staff, the guy who gets to see ALL of the AAR's and not just the ones that are released for public consumption. Do you think that if there were an egregious problem with a piece of American military material that the DOD would trumpet that information out there for everyone (including the enemies) to hear?

Read the AARs.

I have read some, including ones that called the AR/5.56 a problem (Read the 3ID AAR of the initial invasion for example)

As far as someone lacking marksmanship, you'd do well to know something, anything about my wound before commenting.

I know everything I need to know to make the statement I did. Your wound was to your arm... if it were to a more sensitive part of your body (i.e. center mass or head) you would likely not be here. Therefore you were relatively lucky, all things considered.

what are you, a fortune teller? ...snip... The ratios are fine.

What are you? NO ratio is fine until none of ours die to limitless droves of our enemies. You are crazy if you think it's ok to lose any of our guys.

There is no clamor for .30 individual rifles. M14s are being left behind when units have access to them. People prefer the SDM M16s over an M14. The M14 as issued over there (in DMR format) is finicky, heavy, holds less rounds, and is widely spurned.

You know of no clamor... I on the other hand have spoken to friends who wished they'd have had an M14. Just because your limited circle of friends is fine with the AR and mine isn't does not mean that we can claim definitiveness. Or are you conceited enough to believe that you (or your buddy in Afghanistan) can speak for everyone's experience. The Army Chief of Staff on the other hand...

Now let's get right down to it. I'm not claiming that we should go back to the M14. I am claiming that the AR platform has been shown to be inadequate and that when the Army Chief of Staff is looking for a replacement he should look for one that has more beef... Perhaps not a full .308, perhaps a compromise like the 6.8SPC.

arrows are MUCH heavier than bullets

I had a long diatribe along those lines typed in when I made that last post, but I figured if they didn't get it already, I was probably just wasting my time trying to belabor the point so I just deleted it all.

"how does somebody take an elk, moose, or bear with an arrow if it's a simple matter of F=MA or KE=1/2MVsquared?" because an arrow flying from a bow sure as hell doesn't generate as much force as a lot of rounds people wouldn't use to hunt elk, moose, or bear.

It sure is a hell of a lot easier to just wound an animal with an arrow than to kill it.

Mine actually was misaligned... I put a laser bore sighter in and them measured the difference in point of aim. It was easy to see that the point of aim wandered with respect to the boresighter's dot as I switched through the reticles.

I am sick and goddamned tired of people who haven't lived with and relied on these rifles playing armchair commando

That sure sounds like you are trying to call me a REMF or even insinuating that I'm not a veteran. We're not resorting to personal attacks are we? Just because I'm too old to be issued an AR right now does not mean that I always was too old! Armchair commando indeed!

2mm wider is not a magic one shot kill.

:: Sigh :: 2mm wider has NOTHING to do with it; HEAVIER has everything to do with it. Physics is physics and no matter how many discussion ending IM conversations you want to quote or personal insults you wish to fling. I have repeatedly in this thread quoted the simple equation, F=MA. You obviously are unfamiliar with it and its application. Two more millimeters allows you to fire a heavier bullet. Now before you get your panties in a wad about bullet weight alone... velocity is the second variable in that equation (hence my specification of both weight AND velocity earlier). therefore...

Bigger is not a magic recipe to instant kills

Nobody but you is claiming it is. The combination of three things increases the lethality of a round... bullet weight, velocity AND marksmanship. Appears to me you can thank your lucky stars that someone was lacking in that third commodity.

Better center hits than peripheral injuries.

Hallelujah!

The troops and the military DON'T WANT a .30 individual rifle

Now you speak for all troops? Sweet, how'd you get that job? If so many troops are all warm and fuzzy about the performance of the AR platform and the 5.56 round, why is the US Army chief of staff opening hearings into replacing it after fielding so many complaints on the AAR's of returning units? I'm sure he gets to hear a few more ACTUAL reviews of the performance of munitions than you do in your highly scientific and definitive IM's.

I don't know a SINGLE Combat Marine that can say ...

Again, you speak for all marines? Fine I'll fix your butt-hurt, jarhead sensibilities... We all know that a Marine is a superior weapon of war and therefore can even be highly deadly even with a anemic POS rifle. Us mere mortals however would like (or in my case "would have liked") something better.

g-man, you're ignoring the thousands of dead haji and muj?

...and what if you are ignoring thousands of potentially dead GI's because an opponent was able to get off a second shot? Personally, I'd rather continue the discourse and always push the envelope to see if there isn't something possibly better out there that could better equip our troops and therefore prevent their death or increase their lethality in the field. You on the other hand appear to be saying that the AR platform is the be all and end all of weapons and therefore can never be improved upon, end of discussion. So you're willing to gamble the lives of your brothers and sisters in arms on that certainty... So no I'm not ignoring any of your dead rag heads... I just want more of them 6 feet under and fewer of ours... improve the ratio...

I agree about the 6.8 choice for both rifles and machine guns

Nope too late... You've already declared the 5.56/AR combination holy and sacrosanct. Therefore there is no further room for discussion or improvement. That combination is perfect and inoculated against the complaints of us mere "armchair commandos".