About Worst Pieces of Crap That Have Ever Been Issued: 1. Rifles
|January 14th, 2006||#1|
| || |
Worst Pieces of Crap That Have Ever Been Issued: 1. Rifles info
1. The POC in question must have been issued as standard in at least one army.
2. Note the word "standard". The POC in question cannot have been experimental, either in designation or in nature.
3. You must give a good explanation why the weapon in question is truly a POC.
4. I can't think of anything else at the moment.
Now, to decide the worst, seeing as I started the thread, I have decided that I will be the judge, but if this works out even half decently, I would like to invite some of the regulars as a sort of ad-hoc jury, particularly with regards to weapons categories that I know next to nothing about.
With that, let the games begin. As POC number one, I humbly propose the Ross Rifle. This weapon began as a sporting rifle in Canada, and it was different from others for two reasons: 1 was it's incredible accuracy. It was more accurate out of the box than any of it's competitors. 2. It was one of the first straight-pull designs, which allowed the user to reload much fastor than if using other contemporary rifles.
However, it had a severe problem: If the weapon was not kept spotlessly clean it would catastrophically malfunction. (Sound familiar?) If any dirt got into the bolt or chamber, the bolt would not close properly, but the weapon could fire. Firing under those conditions would sent the bolt straight back into the face of the firer. Moreover, the user could not tell if the bolt was completely closed or not. In the trenches of WW I, keeping any rifle that clean was impossible. When the scope of the problem was revealed, which did not take long, Canadian soldiers were allowed to scrounge Lee-Enfields in any way they could, and Canada officially adopted the Lee-Enfield as Canada's combat rifle.
Last edited by Dean; January 14th, 2006 at 18:49..
|January 15th, 2006||#6|
| || |
The early rifles had many problems; I have heard many horror stories such as that the plastic would melt when cam cream and insect repellant was applied, that the rear upper receiver and trigger mechanism housing were made of such poor strength that you could squeeze the walls together and prevent the bolt carrier from travelling down the recoil rod assembly. I have heard that the top cover was made so flimsily that it was common practice to tape it down to prevent it opening randomly during firing, even that the lack of a magazine release catch guard meant that the magazine would often release itself when making contact with your webbing! The list goes on.... What has to be remembered is that the rifle is not a bad idea as such but more a good idea gone bad, for it is essentially an American (British Sterling made) AR18 'widowmaker' (as called by the IRA) switched into bullpup configuration. It is a wonder how such a highly competent company as Enfield Small Arms (producers of the old SMLE and more recent SLR battle rifles) could turn such a good rifle as the AR18 into such a compact and heavy paperweight! It should be noted that both the German G36 and the Japanese Type 89 assault rifles are also based on the AR18, and both are fine rifles, the G36 in particular showing great success on the export market.
It is reported the weapon has undergone 83 modifications in 18 years!
|January 16th, 2006||#9|
| || |
I must agree with you Dean, in reguards to the Ross Rifle. It was a great design and idea but like you said if the rifle had one little speck of dirt the breech would not close and when fired it would fly open. At this point I can't really think of any other POC rifle.
|January 16th, 2006||#10|
| || |
Well if you want a rifle that can be badly mistreated and still fire then go for the AK 47, you can throw it around in the desert let a lorry run over it then pick it it up and fire it. The only thing it does not have is the accuracy of some of the western rifles, but it is still a great bit of kit.
LeEnfield Rides again