Worst Current Issue Weapon(Rifle or Pistol)

nah, it isnt very accurate and not long range, i think somewhere in this forum theres a joke that some drunk russians shot each other with thomsons and they never got each other,

i perfer the ppsh 41
 
Someone's main source is the People's Scientific Propaganda Monthly :lol:

paratroopa said:
nah, it isnt very accurate and not long range, i think somewhere in this forum theres a joke that some drunk russians shot each other with thomsons and they never got each other,

i perfer the ppsh 41
Click to expand...

The PPSh 41 was a fine weapon but the Thompson was the better submachine gun. I think the only real drawback that the Thompson had was it was hard to take apart to clean and put back together. But still it was reliable anyways.

Oh and... the PPSh was much better because it was SO MUCH MORE ACCURATE right? :lol: ;) :lol:
 
"Oh and... the PPSh was much better because it was SO MUCH MORE ACCURATE right?"

Personally i have NEVER seen any accurate RUSSIAN gun.

Ok, they are able to hit a man standing at 50m but they can never hit a coin from 150m or 300m like western made guns. Russians just can't manufacture high quality barrels with their ancient manufacturing systems.
 
No argument here, the thompson was much better made than the ppsh - no contest! The .45 had way more knock down power than the 7.62 Tokarev - again no contest.

The ppsh was also much cheaper to manufacture than the thompson. The 7.62 had considerably more range than the .45 - as well as enough penetration to get through the thick German coats used during WW2. That's one of the reasons the cartridge was designed! To penetrate the thick coats. the old Mosin nagant revolvers would get cought up in the coats fibres....so they came along with the Tok and thus the ppsh. Just my 2 cents.
 
The PPSh's ability to be mass produced even made an impact in the Korean War, though the stories there were that these rounds didn't penetrate the winter coats. Then again we all know the Germans were low on winter jackets in the Eastern Front.
I guess South Koreans at the time never expected to see so many automatic weapons at once. They called the class of weapon, the Submachine gun, the "double gun" because it could fire twice as fast as their M-1 Garands.
 
I always thought that the Tok round was so god at penetrating, though I did hear that the korean and chinese ammo was sub standard because of bad powder - Can't remember where I read this though.
The Tok round is quite a round. I love it - high velocity and small enough to use as a pistol round.
 
Weren't all the PPsh class guns fully automatic with no fire selector? I think so, or was it just certain variants? I can not stand the thought of using fully automatic weapons, unless they are SMG's against numerous enemies, but I have seen video's of soldiers from different countries whose adrenaline started flowing and they put 30 rounds into one man's chest, two things, A. What a waste of ammunition, and B. that shows a lack of respect for the dead. Even terrorists who died should be honored because they at least at the courage and faith to fight and die for a cause, something I see missing in all to many of my American compadres. (Cough *Democrats* Cough)
 
Damien435 said:
Even terrorists who died should be honored because they at least at the courage and faith to fight and die for a cause, something I see missing in all to many of my American compadres.
Click to expand...

Noooooo.

Honorable enemies fight on the battlefield. Cowardly dogs who kill helpless civilians, behead construction workers from the safety of their basement, and pay out of work bums to burst out 30 bullets into a marketplace before running away. No, guantanamo is too light a punnishment. They should all be tortured for all they know and burned at the stake in a public square.
 
Whispering Death said:
Damien435 said:
Even terrorists who died should be honored because they at least at the courage and faith to fight and die for a cause, something I see missing in all to many of my American compadres.
Click to expand...

Noooooo.

Honorable enemies fight on the battlefield. Cowardly dogs who kill helpless civilians, behead construction workers from the safety of their basement, and pay out of work bums to burst out 30 bullets into a marketplace before running away. No, guantanamo is too light a punnishment. They should all be tortured for all they know and burned at the stake in a public square.
Click to expand...

I don't think guerilla warfare is perticularaly dishonourable. They are combatants; the laws of armed conflict don't specify "honourable" in them. Now, as for the terrorist in Iraq, which I do believe should bje trated differently then the insurgents, I don't care what happens to them, hell, hand 'em over to the Isreali's.

Damien: the purpose of having a fully automatic grouping on an assault rifle is to avoid the inefficiancies in having designated "assault weapons" in the section/squad. I think it's been discussed on the forum before.
 
I think a lot of people say they dont like the L94(SA 80). Could anyone explain why?(seeing as im in the UK and want to join the forces)
 
SA80 gets dirty real fast and jams frequently from what I've heard. It is also a monster to clean. I'm not too sure about the latest incarnations, but things have gotten better. I don't think you have to worry about anything except that the puny 5.56 round won't stop a terr with 1 shot - usually take a good double tap.
Thinking of going SAS?
 
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.
 
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.
 
It would be well worth it rhough. The rewards are fantastic. Nothing like a few month's suffering at Hereford...
also, you won't have to mess around with the SA80 - as mentioned - and that would be a nice dream. Since HK blew their brand of fairy dust on the Brit's infantry AR, it is better, but far from perfect. It is still a bullpup, it is still 5.56NATO and it UGGGLYYY
but it shoots-most of the time and is fairly accurate, as far as I've heard.
 
this issue keeps being raised in this topic, the original sa80 was unreliable, however the goverments invested alot of money upgrading it to the sa80a2 which has gone through many field tests and has won the respect of many soldiers.

research more before you insult a gun. :?

(ok ive never tried one before so if any serving soldier wants to correct me go ahead, however i have done a fair bit of reseach on the topic.)
 
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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top