h&k g3

Green Machine

Been busy the past couple of days but I did get some new gun parts in the mail.

I wanted to pick up one of those green POF lowers to put onto my SAR-8. This not Patriot Ordnance Factory that builds AR-15′s and AR-10′s; POF is the Pakistan Ordnance Factory which makes license copies of H&K firearms.

Although the HK G3 has green handguards and stocks, the green lower is unique to Pakistan and Mexico, although some people have also mentioned Malaysia. POF uses the green lower on their MP5 copies.

I removed my steel lower, took out the trigger pack and replaced the selector. Polymer HK lowers use a slightly longer selector body (not the lever itself) so a selector from a steel lower will not fit in a polymer lower.

I did have to slightly dremel down the inside of the green polymer lower to get it to fit onto my SAR-8. Took me about 15 seconds of work and it popped right on. It is clipped and pinned; you can see the “ears” with the fake pins right below the mag release button.

It is a brighter shade of green than the Namibian furniture I have but overall I’m happy with it. When I get around to buying the green Hendsoldt ZF scope, it’ll be a complete green rifle.

3

POF MP5

Not to be confused with Patriot Ordnance Factory, this MP5 is a clone from the Pakistani Ordnance Factory. Pakistan produces licensed H&K clones of the G3 and MP5 for their military forces. This example is a pistol that has an aftermarket brace attached. It could be converted into an SBR with the proper paperwork. Pakistani clones tend to be of good quality and are within mil-spec with their German counterparts so most H&K parts will fit and function. (GRH)

anonymous asked:

HI! I was wondering what modern light infantry firearms would you recommend for killing giant monsters around size and weight of elephants but with agility more akin to cats. I was thinking heavy round assault rifles and or grenade launchers.

Well, not, “light,” but I kinda suspect you mean, “small arms.” The first thing that comes to mind is a .50 anti-material rifle. That’s not just because I did an ask on the Barrett AM rifle a few days ago.

With something that nimble, you wouldn’t want to get within half a mile of it, if you didn’t need to. And, because of how sound works, at those ranges, it wouldn’t even hear the gunshot before the round connected. (Technically, it would never hear the actual gunshot, just the bullet breaking the speed barrier.) Depending on how the critters are put together, a high-explosive round might be the best payload, but I don’t know how well their accuracy holds up at long ranges.

Getting close enough to use a grenade launcher (usually around 100-200m) doesn’t sound like a good idea. At least not if they’re that fast and agile. (For reference the M203 under-barrel grenade launcher is accurate up to around 150m, beyond that you can still put a round general vicinity of over there at up to 350m.)

By, “heavy round,” I assume you mean automatic rifles chambered in 7.62mm (and some other .30 rounds), at which point, that’s usually a battle rifle. I mean, it’s possible you might get the desired result from riddling the things with an H&K G3, but getting that close when you don’t need to be still sounds like a bad idea to me.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.

cdn-apex-predator  asked:

I have an opportunity to buy a Ljungman 42. I've never heard of them before today. Thoughts? (And yes I know they are blue and gold not red and white!) -J

Ljungman, there’s not need to feel down
I said Ljungman, pick yourself of the ground…

I know absolutely nothing about that particular rifle. Seems to be an interesting design, from the few videos available on youtube. I don’t know if I have anyone in my followers with a particular knowledge of that Swedish gun, but if so, feel free to interact.

Fun fact : a 7.62x51 version with a folding stock and a 20-round magazine was created to participate to the replacement of the Ag 42/B competition. It obviously lost (the H&K G3 won over the FN FAL because of its superior durability and lower cost of production) but still look very dashing.

http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/ak/ak4_5/ak5_history.htm

In-depth: French experimental SMGs

Even before World War II, the French Army had experimented with military submachine guns. The French were perhaps more forward-thinking than the British Army in this regard. Both the French and the British had been offered the Thompson and both turned it down, but whereas the British Army dismissed the idea of submachine guns completely, the French began work on their own design called the MAS 35. It was chambered in 7.65x20mm. The prototypes were very basic and had simple tubular butt stocks with flat plates acting as shoulder pieces. The design was not adopted but instead improved upon as the MAS 38. The MAS 38 was unique in that the bolt actually traveled back into the stock at a tilted angle. The internal workings were very complicated and I will spare readers a full explanation.


The MAS 38. Designed at Saint-Étienne and chambered in 7.65mm. This was the standard French submachine gun in World War II.


Despite its unorthodox design, the MAS 38 was adopted as the standard French issue submachine gun. The low-powered cartridge meant that recoil was low and accuracy was good. The weapon was used throughout World War II by both the Free French and the Vichy regime, and would also be used post-war in France’s subsequent conflicts.

After the war it became apparent that submachine guns were more effective than most European militaries had anticipated. The Section Technique de l’Armée (the French equivalent of the Ordnance Board) commissioned the small arms factories at Châtellerault (MAC) and Saint-Étienne (MAS) to develop a new submachine gun in 9x19mm. STA felt that the 7.65mm cartridge was not powerful enough and opted for 9mm since almost every other European country had adopted it.

MAC developed their first prototype in 1947. It had a hinged magazine housing that would fold under the barrel. The magazines used were that of the MP-40. Internally, the return spring was actually located near the trigger mechanism and had a torsion action to it. The end of the spring was attached to a lever that came from a recess from within the bolt. When the bolt flew back, the return spring twisted and tightened.


The MAC 47. Despite a superficial resemblance to the Sten, it was internally nothing alike. The hinged lever underneath the trigger cocked the weapon.


The cocking system was also unusual. There was a lever that folded under the trigger on a hinge. Turning it downwards would cock the weapon. The folding buttstock was made of sheet metal and was considered very unergonomic because it was too large. The return spring system also lost tension after extended use. Another version of this prototype was made that had a wireframe stock and a perforated barrel jacket. The stock folded across the side of the weapon and a brace that ran across the middle of it would deliberately block the open ejection port to prevent it from being discharged in this configuration.

In 1948, MAC produced a new design. It had a cylindrical body and the internal action was based on the Sten gun, but with left-hand cocking. The magazine well was very long and doubled as a fore grip. MP-40 magazines were used. The safety was in the pistol grip and, rather unusually, the stock protruded from the bottom of the grip. Fixed to the side of the stock was a hinged steel plate that was designed for the firer to rest their right elbow on whilst firing from the hip. There was no fire selector on the initial prototypes but subsequent models had two triggers for automatic and semi-automatic fire. Ultimately the weapon was not all that accurate.

MAC produced a lightweight version of this weapon which was made almost exclusively from pressed steel. The wooden stock was replaced with a basic “tromboning” stock which was a simple retracting wireframe. This version was known as the SL and was produced in limited quantities. Those that were made were issued to French troops in Indo-China (now South-East Asia).


The MAC 48. The unusual stock did not align well with the bore and made aiming difficult. When fired from the hip, it was decent.


Meanwhile Saint-Étienne produced a series of prototypes called the C1, the C2, the C3, and the C4. They were all basically derived the same design and differed only in very minor ways. Development started in 1947 and by 1948, the final version known as the C4 had been produced. The action was very similar to the later H&K G3. It had a two-part, L-shaped bolt that ran through a tube over the barrel. The firing pin was fixed to the vertical arm of the bolt. Fitted underneath the long horizontal arm of the bolt, and in front of the shorter vertical arm, was a light bolt head, which was attached to a rotating lever. One end of the lever touched the bolt body and the other end sat in a recess in the weapon’s frame. When gas pressure was applied, the lever rotated, which accelerated the bolt. There was no conventional fire selector. Instead, the trigger was pressurized to give single shots at a half-pull and automatic fire at a full press.

Neither the MAC nor the MAS designs were adopted by the French Army and instead the MAT-49 was chosen.


The MAS 48 C4 in 9mm. The magazine housing, like many other French designs of the time, was hinged and folded under the barrel.


The MAS 49. Chambered in .30 Carbine. Note the long barrel and bipod.


The MAT 49. This was the weapon that was adopted by the French Army. It saw use in Algeria and Indo-China.


Other post-war French designs included the Gevarm D3, produced by ammunition firm Gevelot. It was a very basic Sten clone with a wooden stock and was never manufactured in any quantity. More interesting was the PM-9 produced by Societe Pour l’Exploration des Brevets MGD in 1954. The PM-9 was a very compact folding submachine gun. It is very hard to describe the internal action of the weapon. The bolt was a sort of rod that was connected to a flywheel on the rear end and the front end was connected to a crank that revolved 180 degrees when the bolt moved forward. When it reached the end of its travel, it returned 180 degrees in the opposite direction, upon which the next round would be chambered. When this happened, the flywheel on the rear end of the bolt would oscillate, cocking the weapon, which would then cause a spiral spring to tension and the move the bolt forward again. Very interestingly, the weapon′s fire rate could be changed by adjusting the tension of the spring.


The Gevarm D4 by Gevelot. This version had a retracting stock whereas the D3 had a fixed stock. Not many were made.


The PM-9 produced by MGD and later Erma. The high cost and complex mechanism ensured that it was a commercial failure.


The folded PM-9. In this configuration it was incredibly compact.


The PM-9 design was sold to Erma Werke in Germany in 1955. Erma had difficulty selling the weapon so they instead used its production as a training exercise for young employees. Each unit cost about $150 so production ceased quickly.

anonymous asked:

Hello!! Can you tell me a bit about the different types of common guns that people use, and how they differ/which one is best for what situation? For example, what type of gun might a hitman has, as opposed to a beginner who's owning a gun for the first time for daily life self-defense?

Firearms are really like any other modern consumer product. You split them up by manufacturer and model. Individual companies will sell different products, and different takes on very specific products. Just like how Ford and Honda have different ideas on what a mid-sized sedan should look like, S&W and SIG Sauer have very different ideas about what a service pistol should look like.

The only big wrinkle here is “pattern” weapons. These are firearms that were adopted by the US military, the patents were sold, and as a result, anyone who wants (and has the appropriate licenses to manufacture firearms) can produce an M4/M16 pattern rifle, M1911 pattern handgun, or any number of designs that are publicly available. These are a little different because you don’t usually have cases in other industries where multiple manufacturers can produce finished goods off the same schematics.

And, yes, the different manufacturers have different ideas on what the best features on a gun should be. Walther and Glock both think that having as few controls as possible on a handgun is ideal, because it means there’s less that can snag on clothing when you’re drawing a pistol. In contrast, H&K thinks that large easily accessible controls you can operate while wearing gloves are the better option. There isn’t a right answer here, by the way, it’s elements of personal opinion, that fit what you, as an individual, are looking for.

When you’re a new buyer, the biggest impediment will, usually, be cost. There’s a lot of very cheap pistols on the market, but with many of them you get what you pay for. The companies I just listed to make excellent firearms, but you can expect to spend at least $600 for their pistols. Someone who’s just starting out may see something like a cheap revolver from some off brand manufacturer, and go for that instead.

When you’re asking, what the right weapon is, then it’s a bit wider.

Handguns are primarily useful in very close quarters, when you need to be able to fully conceal the weapon, or when you need to have the weapon on you at all times, but don’t expect to actually use it.

Submachineguns are the next step up, these still use pistol rounds, are larger, heavier, and fully automatic. Again, they’re useful in close quarters when you expect to actually use them and don’t mind carrying the extra weight.

Shotguns are highly versatile. Usually these are assumed to be loaded with varieties of shot (small metal balls), though they can be loaded with anything from beanbag rounds, up through impact grenades. (I’m not aware of any air-burst FRAG-12s, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.) TAZER even makes shock slugs, designed to incapacitate the target through the same means as a stun gun. Seriously, there’s a stupid range of things you can load into a shotgun. Depending on what’s been loaded in it, these can be accurate at up to 100 meters. Buckshot can still reliably put someone down at 30m. The image of these as scatter guns that hit everything in the general vicinity of downrange just doesn’t mesh with reality.

Rifles come in an absurd range of variations. Hunting and precision rifles can put a round where you want them at pretty much any range. High power rifles have an effective range of ~600m, and a theoretical maximum range of ~1.2km. Rifles in the .50 range are usually intended for neutralizing vehicles. Put a round from one of those into the engine block of a truck, and it’s not going anywhere for awhile. So, sadly, all those video games, that gave you a .50 as your final sniper rifle were misleading you. Varmint rifles will sometimes chamber as low as .22 or .223. In spite of that, this is still more than enough to kill a person.

Automatic weapons work off the basic idea that if you’re putting holes in someone, throwing a few extra in the general direction, to make sure at least one gets the job done is probably a good idea, or alternately, if none of them can get the job done alone, maybe teamwork can prevail. Automatic fire patterns work at short to mid range, they take some skill and training to use effectively, and don’t usually shine at long range. But, almost every automatic weapon out there does have a selector switch to set it back down to semi-auto. Note: “almost,” there are a few exceptions. So just because someone has an assault rifle, doesn’t mean they can’t use it for precision shots.

This is the hard part with a question like this, ultimately, firearms are designed to be as versatile as possible. So, if you have an M4 pattern rifle, you can use it for long range shots (up to about 300m), you can use it in close quarters, you can use it at pretty much any range in between. You just can’t hide it under a sweatshirt.

When you’re asking, what’s the best weapon for this character? That’s actually a very complex question to explain for all possible situations.

But, a couple things to keep in mind.

Don’t give your trained characters lasers sights. These things are basically an amusing toy, not the tool of a professional. They’re very useful for inexperienced shooters that haven’t spent enough time on the range, and are in a situation where they’re an inch off panicking. A professional assassin will not get any value from one. Someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing, and wants to pretend they’re an assassin might, however.

Don’t dual wield pistols. Seriously, it’s stupid, stop it. You will waste ammo and not hit what you were aiming at.

Suppressors are real, you can buy them (in most states), and they’re actually pretty useful at keeping the gunshots down to a level you can actually hear over. (You should still be wearing ear protection, as a general safety step anyway, but suppressors help.)

What they do not do is silence a gunshot. What suppressors actually do is reduce the amount of sound the gun produces when fired. This can be the difference between being able to hear the gunshot 100m away and not, but if you’re in the same room, you’re going to hear the gun going off either way.

So, the guy, sneaking around guards at arm’s length, and picking them off with a silenced pistol? Yeah, no, the guards will hear that. James Bond, and Solid Snake, and Sam Fisher are all equally screwed in that regard.

And, an old favorite, “sniper rifle” is basically a marketing term. The term is more descriptive to how you’re using a rifle, it’s not a special class of firearm. If your character needs to pick people off a block or two away, pretty much any reasonably accurate rifle with a scope will get the job done. Even a selective fire automatic rifle, like the H&K G3, or an M4/M16 pattern rifle.

A lot of firearms companies do market sniper rifles. In nearly every case they’re either putting another weapon in their product line through a little additional QA, or slightly modifying an existing product, and saying, “all new now.”

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron.

anonymous asked:

Assault rifles are not a thing, assault weapons are (no, seriously, assault rifles look scary but are mechanically not always different than any semi-auto rifle.). Assault weapons are much more dangerous and usually are fully automatic weapons. An assault rifle is a false classification based upon how a rifle looks. Also some professionals use laser sights, they assist in accuracy in dark situations as well as longer range accuracy.

Well, there is almost nothing correct in this response whatsoever.

The repudiation of assault rifle as a term has been coming from the anti-gun control crowd for awhile, and while I’m sure the NRA would like to memory hole the term, the argument that it’s not a real term is completely unsupportable. The general complaint is that “assault rifle” is a scary term, and that because they don’t plan to assault anyone with theirs, clearly the term doesn’t apply, so they want to remove it from the lexicon. Which isn’t how language works; nor weapon classification, for that matter.

An assault rifle is a select fire automatic rifle that uses intermediate rifle rounds. What it looks like is completely irrelevant (as are it’s internal mechanics, for the most part). One of the only things the anon said that’s marginally accurate is that a civilian variant assault rifle, without a full auto or burst fire setting should be considered something else. Of course, at that point, they’re almost never willing to identify the weapon as it’s next closest relative, the varmint rifle.

Since you won’t see people jumping up and down saying, “no, you don’t understand, this semi-auto-only SIG550 I have is actually just a high-capacity varmint rifle. See, it fires .223 and everything!” So we’re left with the civilian variant of an assault rifle, which may be a mouthful, but is technically accurate.

Incidentally, if you take the exact same external frame for a rifle and rechamber it in a high power round, you get a battle rifle. Which is the current situation with the FN SCAR, which is available for sale in both varieties. When chambered for 5.56x45mm, it’s an assault rifle. Chambered for 7.62x51mm, it’s a battle rifle.

The term assault rifle originates with the German StG 44. StG being short for ”Sturmgewehr.” This was a select fire automatic rifle, chambered in 8mm Kurz fielded by the Wermacht in the final years of World War II. Supposedly, the name Sturmgewehr was selected by Hitler personally for it’s propaganda value.

For those of you who don’t speak German, the language is rather enamored with creating compound words on the fly. Sturm is a cognate for storm, with the same secondary meanings, so depending on context, this can refer either to the weather phenomena or to attack or assault. Gewehr literally translates to gun or rifle (both are completely valid choices, depending on context). So the direct translation of Sturmgewehr as Assault Rifle is accurate, and not a product of someone coming up with a term, and then kludging the translation backwards. If it was 1945, and you wanted to say the translation was Storm Gun, you probably could have gotten away that, and you’d be seeing people complaining about how their firearm isn’t a storm gun, because they never hunt when it’s rainy.

If you’re curious, the term battle rifle originated to differentiate automatic rifles chambered in heavier cartridges from assault rifles. Specifically the M14, FN FAL, H&K G3, and the BAR. (Arguably, you can exclude the BAR from this this list because it predates the StG44, and some people do.)

Also, worth remembering it’s the Sturmgewehr, not the Angriffwaffen.

Assault weapon is (or was) a real US Military term as well, but it’s not what you’re thinking of. Assault weapons are an obscure class of close support explosive launchers designed for neutralizing light armor vehicles and emplacements, at medium range. There’s a handful of these, they fall somewhere between a grenade launcher and RPGs. Some were rifle grenades, while others had dedicated launchers. If I’m bluntly honest, I don’t know much on the subject, because they’re a fairly obscure bit of military weapon technology from the late 70s and early 80s.

Now, I do have to give you partial credit, the laser sight is one way to improve visibility in low light conditions. They’re also one of the worst possible solutions to that problem, because you’re announcing to your victim that, “hey, I’m pointing a gun at you.

Night sights/glow sights, and reflex sights all accomplish the same end result without literally sticking a dot on your opponent.

Lasers can be quite useful in close quarters, when the person wielding the gun is inexperienced. It helps them to judge exactly where their pistol is pointed in a clear, and difficult to screw up, way. For someone who carries a gun for self defense, but hasn’t spent enough time on the range to really be comfortable with it, they work. You can think of laser sights as “training wheels for guns,” if you want.

Night sights replace the normal targeting beads on a pistol with ones that will be more visible in low light situations. These may be transparent plastic and designed to catch and redirect available light, or they may simply be colors designed to be more visible in low light conditions. Also the exact steps necessary to install them will vary wildly depending on the pistol in question.

As with assault rifles, reflex sights are nothing new, but they have become far more prevalent in recent years. The basic idea is that you have a scrim mirror setup, and you project a point of light onto that (usually a green or red LED with modern sights). When viewing through the sight, you’ll see a dot approximating where the weapon will fire, similar to a laser, but without actually painting the target. These can be useful at close and medium ranges to put a round where you want, quickly.

Unfortunately, you can’t use lasers for long range targeting with a bullet. As it turns out, bullets are physical objects, and they are affected by things like gravity. At short range this isn’t particularly noticeable, but if you’re trying to draw a bead on something at long range, then you need to adjust for bullet drop, and other factors that will affect a physical object, but not a focused beam of light.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron.