I don't get the shorty craze. I saw on one of the ar-15 sites (arfcom or m4carbine.net) someone got a scar and did a range rpeort. Several people told him he should go class 3 to get a 14.5 inch barrel. I dont see why, 1.5 inches wont give you a close quarters advantage. I like when someone buys a 20 inch ar-15 since there pretty much target shooting anyway and people say to get tacticool carbines since you can room clear and dismount vehicles faster......

The taurs judge sucks.

I just assumed... Your icon has Thrice lyrics.

how bout:

http://airbornecombatengineer.typepa...under_50_.html

Shorty rifles and snubby revolvers just look cool. I think most folks at least once or twice or more will buy a firearm because it looks cool. Firearms are a consumer product and people often buy their product based on look, smell, touch etc. I own a Luger and a Webley just because they look great (IMHO) and I had wanted one of each for a couple decades. Finally own both. Almost never shoot them, but so what? They look cool and I own them. :cool:

I gotta admit, id love an all original .455 webley (not one of the rechambered ones) myself :)

http://www.imfdb.org/images/d/d7/XM8.JPG

'Nuff said.

I see that and i raise you:

http://world.guns.ru/assault/aicw-2005.jpg

and this:

http://world.guns.ru/assault/oicw.jpg

Enough said.

It wasn't a completely bad idea...if it could have been achieved at a much lower cost and resulted in a lighter, less complex weapon. The technology just wasn't ready yet at the time (still isn't today, either).

Mostly just a redundant idea. I mean, H&K might as well have just offered them the G36 as it was - because the original G36 was a more developed and refined design at that point.

The XM8 was pretty much a G36 in a new body. It's the same kind of internals and same charging handle and magazines. Originally the US army was close to adopting it

I don't know why. The M4 and M16A4 are great weapons. And no, they don't jam that often.