The Small Arms Thread, Part 8: 2018; ICSR to be replaced by US Army with interim 15mm Revolver Cannon.

[Meplat]

Kel Tec.

 

NOT. EVEN. ONCE.

Loosely related- Apparently "Kel Tec" is now known as "Kek Tec" on /k/.. While I actually like some of their products, it still drew a laugh out of me.

[Meplat]

Finally. Proof that by 1944, Nazi scientists had invented artillery shells with cordless Dremels packed inside.

 

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/12/28/hell-in-my-hands-battle-of-bastogne-pistol/#disqus_thread

 

Much superior to the earlier models with the Dremels that you had to plug in before firing.

It looks a bit odd, the few real battlefield pickups I've had chances to inspect where you knew the owner was snuffed, always had that distinctive lacelike corrosion pattern caused by blood/bodily fluids.  Other than some green fuzz, the "damage" looks almost new.

[Donward]

It looks a bit odd, the few real battlefield pickups I've had chances to inspect where you knew the owner was snuffed, always had that distinctive lacelike corrosion pattern caused by blood/bodily fluids.  Other than some green fuzz, the "damage" looks almost new.

Yeah. The lack of patina/corrosion on the damage is the first initial give away. Also the damage doesn't look homogeneous but like someone worked with different tools.

 

I've handled some Japanese rifles (and a sword) that were battlefield pickups by (if I remember right) SeaBees on Tarawa. And those things looked like they were yanked out of a fox hole or a slit trench after naval gunfire, artillery and grenades had been used to kill their original owners. Also, all of the weapons had provenance such as paperwork, old photographs (or reproduced photos) of the guys who picked them up, unit numbers, dates and the damn weapons still had the original chrysanthemum stamping on the receiver. 

[Meplat]

Yeah. The lack of patina/corrosion on the damage is the first initial give away. Also the damage doesn't look homogeneous but like someone worked with different tools.

 

I've handled some Japanese rifles (and a sword) that were battlefield pickups by (if I remember right) SeaBees on Tarawa. And those things looked like they were yanked out of a fox hole or a slit trench after naval gunfire, artillery and grenades had been used to kill their original owners. Also, all of the weapons had provenance such as paperwork, old photographs (or reproduced photos) of the guys who picked them up, unit numbers, dates and the damn weapons still had the original chrysanthemum stamping on the receiver. 

I have a Type 44 that is rather unmolested, but yes, most look whipped.

[Sturgeon]

The full-size Savage pistols are a terrible design:

 

[Toxn]

Finally. Proof that by 1944, Nazi scientists had invented artillery shells with cordless Dremels packed inside.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/12/28/hell-in-my-hands-battle-of-bastogne-pistol/#disqus_thread'>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/12/28/hell-in-my-hands-battle-of-bastogne-pistol/#disqus_thread

Much superior to the earlier models with the Dremels that you had to plug in before firing.

The damage on that thing looks way too low-energy to be real. Even ignoring the suspiciously good condition, artillery fragments would penetrate or leave splinters, producing noticable curled edges around the impact site.

Bullets would leave friction-welded pieces of jacket or form distinctive furrowed scars if they bit in at all. The curled edges around impact sites would, again, be very obvious.

There should be various sizes of damage, including pitting from secondary fragments and possibly large distortions where major components were warped or twisted.

In short, Don has the right of it.

[Sturgeon]

So... I note that Light Rifle IV didn't do very well, getting less than half the comments that Light Rifle III got. I'm surprised by this, because while LRIII just covered random modifications made to the M1, LRIV covered what I'd assume would be more exciting select-fire M1 conversions.

Any thoughts on this?

[Belesarius]

I enjoyed the article, but I've talked about most of the select fire versions with you and Colli on TS over the past several months, as the light rifle series has developed.  It's why I didn't comment. 

 

Edit: The gap between the articles also might have something to do with it.

[Sturgeon]

I enjoyed the article, but I've talked about most of the select fire versions with you and Colli on TS over the past several months, as the light rifle series has developed.  It's why I didn't comment. 

 

Edit: The gap between the articles also might have something to do with it.

 

Went from about 2.75 months to 3 months (and I can't shorten it any more because of TFB's budget), so it wasn't that much longer of a wait.

[Toxn]

So... I note that Light Rifle IV didn't do very well, getting less than half the comments that Light Rifle III got. I'm surprised by this, because while LRIII just covered random modifications made to the M1, LRIV covered what I'd assume would be more exciting select-fire M1 conversions.

Any thoughts on this?

Few comments may simply mean that you've done a great job snd coveted the whole issue very well.

At least that's what I tell myself.

[Belesarius]

Only other thing I can think of is the season?  Everyone busy doing shit for the holidays.

[Toxn]

Other possible explanations:

Too few bun fights between famous historical figures.

No troops harmed during events.

Something something dry and techical subject matter.

Other article writer included a picture of self posing in a bikini.

Not the biggest, best, most expensive, worst etc.

Not tie-in to Hitler possibly winning WWII.

Points not given in list form.

Combinatorial factors (aka: ten pics of Hitler wearing most expensive bikini)

[Collimatrix]

So, Roger is making a Glock clone... again? I don't get it.

[Toxn]

So, Roger is making a Glock clone... again? I don't get it.

Who's Roger? And what is his deal with Glocks?

[Collimatrix]

It is the auto corrected name of a publicly traded American firearms company famous for its casting prowess. I am typing on my nerd dildo and not a proper keyboard and don't catch all the errors the keyboof silicon helpfully introduces. It wanted me to say "Flock."

[Toxn]

Roger and his Flock clones, man.

[Collimatrix]

Easily the best swing band of the 1960s.

[Toxn]

Low bar to clear though.

[Sturgeon]

M855A1 penetrates really well, but not quite as well vs. ceramic as M61...

 

[Brick Fight]

So... I note that Light Rifle IV didn't do very well, getting less than half the comments that Light Rifle III got. I'm surprised by this, because while LRIII just covered random modifications made to the M1, LRIV covered what I'd assume would be more exciting select-fire M1 conversions.

Any thoughts on this?

 

A few possibilities:

 

-Anything there is to cover, you covered. You layed out a realistic goal with the post, and didn't really leave any wiggle room for speculation.

 

-Lack of interest in the subject. For Turbonerds like us, detailed weapons development histories can be fascinating, but there's a reason why Ambrose outsells Zaloga, and why Ensign's Wehrabait articles tend to get actual comments versus things like factory notes on how many sprockets were produced in late 1940.

 

-Not having a conversational tone. Your article could be a really good starting point for reference work, but it's not exactly communicating with anyone in a way that creates the desire to discuss it with anonymous strangers. I remember when Alex was talking about how curious it was that videos where he put in a lot of research and production effort would often lose in views/comments to him just bullshitting with you/Ian/Pat. Well, those latter videos had a conversational tone where people felt they could elaborate upon or debate with what you said, and weren't anything more than they promised: Dudes talking 'bout their guns. Lacking conversational tone isn't really a criticism; it could just be how an article is. I'm just saying that different pieces go for different reactions.

 

-Lots of words. This is obviously a "dumb" criticism to an extent, but I rarely read large blog posts in one go. I'll cycle back through the tabs and slowly make my way through it over hours or days so that I rarely am reading it while not in the mood to. Unfortunately, once I'm done reading it, It's often three pages deep on the main site, and nobody else bothered to read it quickly and start up a conversation.

 

Those are off the top of my head, but I don't claim to have any idea what I'm talking about.

[Donward]

Is it comments or story clicks that TFB is after?

[Sturgeon]

Clicks, but I can't see those.

I dunno, maybe there's nothing to it, but I was a bit disappointed because I sorta felt LRIV was going to be the article that got folks really interested in the topic, and the exact opposite seems to be true.

[Khand-e]

Just follow up every article better, like "WHY YOUR FAVORITE GUN IS FUCKING SHIT!, oh, and also the Light Rifle, part IV."

[Tied]

If you really want to make waves, take the great "not all that greatening" of 2015 to GPMG's

 

mainly, i just want to watch someone shit all over the MG-3 on an English website 

[Tied]

*deep concern intensifies*