Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

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


Khand-e

Recommended Posts

If you can accept a rifle with ergonomics that feels like it was made by a seventh grader with a scrap 2x4 and a dull saber saw then sure. Sights are meh. Bolt feels sand papery as metal rasps against metal. No safety. It is very utilitarian. But lags behind Springfield, Enfield, Mauser, Mosin and the much maligned Arisakas IMO along with a load of other guns.

The bayonet is LOL fun.

Again, we are talking military bolt guns. There isn't THAT much difference. But the recent spell of MAS 36 champ-eening amounts to a lot of gun hipster ism.

I have no idea what you're talking about. None of the MAS 36s I've seen are anything like that.

 

For a start, the bolt handle is in an excellent location. You want to compare the ergos of the MAS 36 negatives against the Enfield? Really, a rifle that has almost no curvature or purchase to the wrist of the stock? You're claiming the sights are "meh", except the sights compare favorably in every respect but precision and windage adjustment to the Mauser, Mosin, Arisaka, and early Springfields (1903A1 and before) and Enfields (anything previous to the No. 4). The lack of windage adjustment and safety are those idiosyncrasies I mentioned earlier, as they were explicit French requirements.

As for the bolt feeling sandpapery and not slick enough... I dunno, bud. The one you got must just have sucked. I can't say that I recall a MAS 36 that had an unusually rough action.

So, you're wrong, the recent spell of MAS 36 "champ-eening" is people recognizing a good design for what it is, your misguided patronization be damned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea what you're talking about. None of the MAS 36s I've seen are anything like that.

As for the bolt feeling sandpapery and not slick enough... I dunno, bud. The one you got must just have sucked. I can't say that I recall a MAS 36 that had an unusually rough action.

 

Shitty repark/refinish examples. I've seen a few where it's like they did not clean the blasting media off before assembling the piece.

 

Not a design fault, and a reasonable example is pretty damned slick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The rifle is not fine"

0_1366a4_1663f961_orig.jpg

 

http://twower.livejournal.com/1761540.html

SF guy small rant about Russian Forces (Army, Police, Internal troops, etc) don't have clear rules about weapon mods, and he rant about some situation when it is a problem.

The "lego" sickness is spreading.

Adding complexity rarely improves things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just listed things like launchers and mortars under "Infantry support weapons" in the original small arms thread on the WoT forums.

 

Basically anything that's man portable and doesn't require a vehicle or static/semi static mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DSC00382-660x495.jpg

soldier_M4.jpg

Mechanically, you may find that (what appears to be) snaphaunce lock to be more complex than the AR. Wheel-locks are another example where added complexity was not an improvement and was left by the wayside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And for a bit more fun-

 

How is this an improvement? (other than being a triumph of complexity for complexity's sake..)

 

x1cw1Pu.jpg

 

All fun aside, hanging more junk on a piece, just because, is a symptom of "lego sickness".

 

It's related to the Tacticool curb feelers and mudflaps" affliction one will encounter at many gunshows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey. I'm not trying to bash Sturgeon for digging a French rifle. Far from it. But if we find out that he has been listening to Michael Buble while sipping a Napa Valley red wine and submitting articles to Oprah's magazine, don't say I didn't warn ya!

Whatever turns people's bolts. Hell, I'm the guy that unironically tries to make the case that there are niche roles still for lever action rifles in modern shooting.

Literally every MAS I've cycled over the years felt that way. Maybe Century Arms sent a shittier batch up to the Big 5 stores 12 years back and the result has been sitting on gun shelves since.

Which is always the trouble with comparing these mil surp rifles because so many of them vary in quality.

As per the MAS, there is great value to pointing out that it isn't a complete pile and was (and is if you can find the right one) a perfectly adequate gun.

But it's not a Springfield, Enfield, Mauser, etc. Now I get the need for people to want to shake up same boring "Best Military Bolt Gun" list by throwing in something made by the Swiss or Norwegians. And with the collectibles market being out of whack, who wants to pay $800 for a Speingfield that has been rotting in some warehouse for 7 decades or a Mauser that Mitchell butchered?

You see the same with classic cars now that 99 percent of all GTOs and Corvettes and whatnot are restored, you'll have guys glomming onto the Corvair for instance as being a great classic.

Now comparing a MAS to a Corvair is unfair to the former. But it's a fair example of hipster ism that I was referring to where folks take a little known thing (in this case relatively speaking) and pretend that it's better than the societal norm. In the case of Internet gun wankery, the difference with mil surp bolt guns isn't that much even.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...