|
|
#111
07-08-2009, 11:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
__________________
"Everything is impossible until somebody does it - Batman RIP Kevin Conroy, the one true Batman 
|
|
#112
07-09-2009, 02:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Niiiiice. Would a training house ("Killing House") be like Barbie's dream house?
__________________
|
|
#113
07-09-2009, 06:11 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"Everything is impossible until somebody does it - Batman RIP Kevin Conroy, the one true Batman
|
|
#114
07-09-2009, 06:25 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I want to get my hands on a DSA Stg-58 OSW SOPMOD insted of an M-4. there is something to be said about putting the largest hole possible in a target.
|
|
#115
07-09-2009, 09:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
That gun looks really heavy though. And reloading and ergonomics are better on the M4-series than the DSA 58 FN FAL carbine.
__________________
|
|
#116
07-09-2009, 04:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've held a DSA, it is a bit heavy on you after awhile
__________________
 "There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life." Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle Psalm 144:1 “It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
|
|
#117
07-10-2009, 02:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I remember I held an FN FAL once in a gun shop ("Gun Depot"), and while I didn't know what it was at the time, I remember it was pretty heavy. I thought it was some type of LMG. Granted, I was probably 11-12 years old, I still remember it was a hefty piece. Since the DSA is a smaller carbine version, I'd assume it'd be lighter, but with all those rails and accessories, as well as a fully loaded 30-round magazine, I can image the gun might be pretty heavy.
__________________
|
|
#118
07-10-2009, 06:49 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Personally I have a friend who has been accused of being a mercenary(From what I know about that time in his life he was a Mercenary I Name Only). He has used various weapons in Oman and Yemen and he will to this day reach for a beat up FAL before he touches a New M-16. As far as weight goes there are times when you want to travel as light as posible and there are times when you have to strap a Ma Duce to your ruck and F.I.D.O. I've known people in both situations and I prefer to travel too heavily armed than too lightly.
|
|
#119
07-10-2009, 07:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Huh, what war-crazed urge would tempt someone to carry a 120lb Browning M2 around, I wonder...
 I'd rather go in favor of carrying a lighter rifle with lots of ammuntion. Like say I was serving in WWII. I'd probably pick the M1 Carbine over the M1 Garand, because it is lighter and holds more bullets. While most men only carried 4 or 5 magazines in total, I'd stuff as many to my belt as possible. And only two 7 round magazines for the .45? No way. The fact the FN FAL Carbine and the ammunition it fires are very heavy, from a tactical value that doesn't impress me much. Sure the heavy weight reduces the recoil, and the 7.62 rounds can punch some good holes, but if you can't haul ass under fire because your being weighed down by tons of metal, it won't matter what weapon you carry, you'll just make a good corpse.
__________________
|
|
#120
07-10-2009, 03:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
[quote=Gunmaster45;4478]Huh, what war-crazed urge would tempt someone to carry a 120lb Browning M2 around, I wonder...
QUOTE] In the case of a friend who has carried an M-2 SAS style. His unit had to transport the thing cross country for I forget how many miles and My friend is 6'4" and built like a packmule. At the time he didn't mind carrying that much weight but he has bitched about having to manpack a TOW launcher. as far as weight goes the Bren gun is effectivly a 20 pound rifle but there is a very good reason it lasted from WWII to the Falklands. Compaired to that a FAL is lightweight and manuverable.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
