Worst Current Issue Weapon(Rifle or Pistol)

Buckaro said:
Going SAS....if i joined it wouldnt be though the army, id go into the RAF regiment first, or marines, if i had to go into the SAS the army way and i wanted to id leave and join the army instead and apply.

But if i get pilot(RAF) then thats not going to happen.

And anyway, the SAS is super hard to join, fitness is incredible, and you have to have done a few years service first.
Click to expand...

Considering you have only two cracks at making SAS, this is the Army doing you a favor.


r031Button said:
the_13th_redneck said:
Going SAS then u don't have to worry about the SA80 as they usually use the M-16 and its variants.
The SA80 is also a poor weapon in that it is strictly right handed. If you're a left handed shooter, you've got issues.
Click to expand...

Not to nit pick; but they actually use a C 7 varient:P
Click to expand...

The C 7 is an M-16 Variant. ;)
 
the_13th_redneck said:
Buckaro said:
Going SAS....if i joined it wouldnt be though the army, id go into the RAF regiment first, or marines, if i had to go into the SAS the army way and i wanted to id leave and join the army instead and apply.

But if i get pilot(RAF) then thats not going to happen.

And anyway, the SAS is super hard to join, fitness is incredible, and you have to have done a few years service first.
Click to expand...

Considering you have only two cracks at making SAS, this is the Army doing you a favor.


r031Button said:
the_13th_redneck said:
Going SAS then u don't have to worry about the SA80 as they usually use the M-16 and its variants.
The SA80 is also a poor weapon in that it is strictly right handed. If you're a left handed shooter, you've got issues.
Click to expand...

Not to nit pick; but they actually use a C 7 varient:P
Click to expand...

The C 7 is an M-16 Variant. ;)
Click to expand...


Not if your a partiotic Canadian it isn't:P
 
Buckaro said:
Going SAS....if i joined it wouldnt be though the army, id go into the RAF regiment first, or marines, if i had to go into the SAS the army way and i wanted to id leave and join the army instead and apply.

But if i get pilot(RAF) then thats not going to happen.

And anyway, the SAS is super hard to join, fitness is incredible, and you have to have done a few years service first.
Click to expand...
If you want to go SAS i suggest going on the all arms comando course first, just for a taster of whats to come (though this taster is watered down but is still tough)
 
Get Back to the topic

The US should adopt a better sidearm for the soldiers instead of the beretta m92fs, instead they should use the German P08 Luger, its old, 9mm, but dam powerful, that pistol can really ruin your day, All they have to do is maybe modify it to hold more ammo rather than just 8 rounds, The luger is kind of Like out Colt M1911,8 shots, old, yet powerful. One shot is as deadly as .45 or a .50, if not more powerful. I've shot this gun before, I shot a foot thick tree from 50 meters away and the bullet went nearly half way into the tree and making a big hollow hole. Imagine if you gave the luger some 9mm hollowpoint bullets hehehe. :twisted:
 
devilwasp said:
If you want to go SAS i suggest going on the all arms comando course first, just for a taster of whats to come (though this taster is watered down but is still tough)
Click to expand...

Never heard of it, oh and if i joined the marines it would be the SBS, but anyway...so whats that course about, and how do you get to do it?
 
The US should adopt a better sidearm for the soldiers instead of the beretta m92fs, instead they should use the German P08 Luger, its old, 9mm, but dam powerful, that pistol can really ruin your day, All they have to do is maybe modify it to hold more ammo rather than just 8 rounds, The luger is kind of Like out Colt M1911,8 shots, old, yet powerful. One shot is as deadly as .45 or a .50, if not more powerful. I've shot this gun before, I shot a foot thick tree from 50 meters away and the bullet went nearly half way into the tree and making a big hollow hole. Imagine if you gave the luger some 9mm hollowpoint bullets hehehe.
Click to expand...


:D

You want the US Army to adopt a desighn that is more than a 100 years old? While their at it, they should use the K98 as their new Rifle? How about the BAR forr the next 21st century SAW? The Berreta is a superb pistol, and it fires the same 9X19 Luger Parabellum ammo...
 
yangyang789 said:
I think Mg-42 is the most cool and devilish machine Gun.To the worst I turn to M-16.For the AK-47 I would say:Good Job! 8)
Click to expand...

The MG-42 is nolonger in service, the MG3 is. The M16 is far more acturate that the AK-47, and the M16 has better penatration and is just better. AK47 has a larger 7.62mm round, after the first round is question able.

I say the best is the M16 and the worst is the Styer.
 
Bullpup-designed weapons in general make me mad when I attempt to hit things with them...I've been spoiled with the M16A4... :rambo:
 
I say the best is the M16 and the worst is the Styer
Click to expand...

Why do you think Australia got rid of the M-16 and SLR and got the Styer? Cos we're idiots? No. Clearly not. It's becuase it was a better weapon all round than the M-16. The M-16 is approx 40 years old.

What evidence have you got to back up your comment about the Styer? And have you ever fired either of them?
 
I've fired a Steyr and an SA80, and the only thing that has brought them down in my eyes is the bullpup design. (Well the Steyr, anyway, the SA80 just sucked overall).

And with all due respect, the M16 is not 40 years old. It's less than 10 in the latest incarnation, the A4...and if it ain't broken, why replace it?
 
chewie_nz said:
Cadet Airman Adam Seaman said:
I say the best is the M16 and the worst is the Styer.
Click to expand...

no complaints here with the steyr...i thought it was a very nicely balanced weapon.
Click to expand...

Really I founmd it kind of light although I was impressed with its durability or perhaps I mean ruggedness.
 
I find the Styer to be a horrible weapon, do to it falling apart, and I just hate bullpup designed weapons.

The M-16 may be 40 years old but I shoots straight, shoots hard, very durable, and light.

Why do you think Australia got rid of the M-16 and SLR and got the Styer? Cos we're idiots? No. Clearly not. It's becuase it was a better weapon all round than the M-16. The M-16 is approx 40 years old.

What evidence have you got to back up your comment about the Styer? And have you ever fired either of them?
Click to expand...

WHy do you think that more than 20 counties use the M16, including Canada and England.
 
Canada uses the C7 and C8 which are modified versions of the M16 and M4 designs, holland and denmark use these too as does the UK special forces. Singapore has also dropped the M16 developing there own bullpup rifle the SAR-21.
 
Cadet Airman Adam Seaman said:
I find the Styer to be a horrible weapon, do to it falling apart, and I just hate bullpup designed weapons.
Click to expand...

FALLING APART???? what the hell were you doing with it at the time????

well, as i said, i have no complaints with it and in fact i haven't even heard any complaints from friends who are still serving.
 
I find the Styer to be a horrible weapon, do to it falling apart, and I just hate bullpup designed weapons.

The M-16 may be 40 years old but I shoots straight, shoots hard, very durable, and light.
Click to expand...

I work with Styers every damn day. Week in, week out. I have never seen mine (or anyone elses in my regiment) fall apart, or have issues with accuracy of fire.

What do you mean falling apart. Tell me how you reckon a Styer fell apart on you. I think you just don't like it, and are now attempting to justify your point of view.

From what you say, I don't think you've had ANY experience at all with Styers.

The design of the Styer is so SIMPLE it doesn't fall apart. It doesn't break. It doesn't malfunction with regularity, and it can be stripped without any tools at all. And component wise, it is made up of only 3 main parts, and 11 other parts (including firing pin, sling swivels etc).

I just don't think your at all justified in what your saying.
 
i concur with what nicks saying;

and i back it up with this;
http://www.steyr-aug.com/article.htm

my favourite quote from that article;

detect no major faults in the Steyr AUG system. All who participated in the SOF test and evaluation praised its balance and handling characteristics. It's a stunning triumph and complete vindication of the bullpup concept properly executed. In particular, the AUG 1.5x scope offers a true vision of the future. Hit probability and the speed of target acquisition are enhanced significantly by this sturdy carrying handle. You can expect to see more optics of this type on assault rifles of the future.

I would not hesitate to carry an AUG into battle
Click to expand...

armor.jpg


Why do you think Australia got rid of the M-16 and SLR and got the Styer? Cos we're idiots? No. Clearly not. It's becuase it was a better weapon all round than the M-16. The M-16 is approx 40 years old.

What evidence have you got to back up your comment about the Styer? And have you ever fired either of them?
Click to expand...

WHy do you think that more than 20 counties use the M16, including Canada and England.
Click to expand...

probably because it's cheaper...but as we all know...cheaper doesn't often mean better
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top