AR pistols - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: AR pistols

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich kid View Post
    Once upon a time the army was in the business of winning wars and selected weapons on rigorous testing like that done by the Thompson la garde committee.
    You mean the tests where they ended up killing the cattle they shot with a hammer because the single round didn't do it? Or judging the striking power by an eyeball, not measured, assessment of how far a cadaver swayed when it was shot? Or the decision to shoot the cattle multiple times the second day? Without any autopsies, I believe.

    You mean THAT "rigorous testing"?

    That confirms my opinion of the usefulness and validity of your opinions.
    www.inshadowinlight.com
    I don't care as much about making you more "tactical" as I do about making you better able to be the one still standing after the fight is over.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Back to the serious discussion...

    I'm informed that unless the gas port is worked on, 10.5" barrel is the best length for best reliability. So I'm scheming to pick one up with that. I believe it has a place in the overall scheme of gun-things and am looking forward to working it up and writing about it.
    www.inshadowinlight.com
    I don't care as much about making you more "tactical" as I do about making you better able to be the one still standing after the fight is over.

  4. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich kid View Post
    You got it. Biggest piece of junk ever made. Too bad the men that died in the rice paddies of viet nam with a jammed ar in their hands, aren't here to bear witness. As a government entity the army is a victim of politics, budgets, international treaties and a lot of other impediments. Once upon a time the army was in the business of winning wars and selected weapons on rigorous testing like that done by the Thompson la garde committee. The weapon they selected on that study wasn't the ar-15/m-16.

    I see lots of criticism of the sheeple on this forum but what are you if you want an AR because that's what the army uses in its full auto version. That's the same army that surrendered unconditionally to that Asian powerhouse, the republic of Vietnam. Try being more than a wannabe with your pseudo military and worthless rifle.
    I will agree with you on one point, when the M-16 was FIRST introduced it did have some problems, but after revisions it became a good dependable weapon, if it was truly junk as you say even our military would not have kept it in service for 45+ years, as for the rest of your drivel, I make a rule not to argue with morons, as they will ware you down to there level then beat you with experiance
    Bad Guys of the world beware the next time you think about jumping on a old guy, because its a fair bet he's to old to fight and probably to fat to run, but can put one in your eye at 50ft with his weak hand

  5. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocketgeezer View Post
    I will agree with you on one point, when the M-16 was FIRST introduced it did have some problems, but after revisions it became a good dependable weapon, if it was truly junk as you say even our military would not have kept it in service for 45+ years, as for the rest of your drivel, I make a rule not to argue with morons, as they will ware you down to there level then beat you with experiance
    Lol. It sure sounds to me like your only argument is that it's the issue weapon of our military and therefore it has to be good. Of course, this is a blatant display of foolishness. Our military is tied to this piece of junk by the NATO treaty.

    If you refuse to think for yourself, which seems to be a burden that most of this site is unwilling to bear, I don't think you have any basis to question anyone's intelligence. Your intelligence and judgment are likewise questionable, especially when you refuse to use what little you may have.

  6. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Warbirds View Post
    OOh the stupid is strong with this one.
    .
    And that is all he deserves.
    .
    .
    An AR pistol is great for those that live in a state that prohibits SBR or are waiting for their paperwork to come back. It is more useable than a Draco pistol since you can put your cheek on the buffer tube, but it will rattle your jaw. The short barrel gives away a lot of the performance and like someone said it is real loud. One thing that Glass Wolf? said, a 7.5 inch barrel is too short for a suppressor, I can't remember if 9.5 or 10 is the minimum, but the pressure at 7.5 is too much per the manufacturers FAQ. I consider it more of a range toy than a real tool, but to each his own.
    Perhaps it's all you can muster. If you are so knowledgeable then why are you unable to refute my argument? By your own admission the AR pistol is nothing but a range toy.

  7. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Warbirds View Post
    OOh the stupid is strong with this one.
    .
    And that is all he deserves.
    .
    .
    An AR pistol is great for those that live in a state that prohibits SBR or are waiting for their paperwork to come back. It is more useable than a Draco pistol since you can put your cheek on the buffer tube, but it will rattle your jaw. The short barrel gives away a lot of the performance and like someone said it is real loud. One thing that Glass Wolf? said, a 7.5 inch barrel is too short for a suppressor, I can't remember if 9.5 or 10 is the minimum, but the pressure at 7.5 is too much per the manufacturers FAQ. I consider it more of a range toy than a real tool, but to each his own.
    That's assuming you're using an AR chambered in .223
    I'm using an AR pistol with an 8" barrel in .300 AAC for home defense, and it's quite a capable firearm out to 100 yards, which is far beyond any distance inside my home, and about the ragne from my home to the street that delineates the end of my property line. I'm considering going with a suppressor on that gun when I convert it to an SBR. If the supporessor is integral, I'll only need to tax stamp the suppressor, since the barrel will end up being 16" with the suppressor.

    No, troll. Plenty of people disagree with me on a great number of topics on this forum, and so far, you're one of the only trolls I've encountered. Christ, you're not even very good at it. Are you even trying?
    No statement should be believed because it is made by an authority.
    Robert A. Heinlein

  8. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich kid View Post
    Perhaps it's all you can muster. If you are so knowledgeable then why are you unable to refute my argument? By your own admission the AR pistol is nothing but a range toy.
    .
    By your own admission you are arguing, so why bother? You are just trying to get peoples goat. You want to simplify the US loss in Vietnam to the M16 being inferior? So I guess that those clearly superior AK47s were also used to kick our cans to the curb in Iraq not once but twice. And that loss in Afghanistan, devastating that our M16s and M4s failed the country again. Heaven knows the superior weapon always wins, our Sherman tanks cruised through the ineffective tiger tank fire like they were shoot marshmallows right? No, ridiculous to try to simplify a war down to one point to provoke an argument.
    .
    .
    And heaven knows science has been nothing but downhill since 1904, their tests were so scientific that they engraved the .45 supremacy as the 11 commandment.
    .
    So back to what your argument deserves..... lol
    Time to add FireMarshall Bill to the block list.

  9. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by GlassWolf View Post
    That's assuming you're using an AR chambered in .223
    I'm using an AR pistol with an 8" barrel in .300 AAC for home defense, and it's quite a capable firearm out to 100 yards, which is far beyond any distance inside my home, and about the ragne from my home to the street that delineates the end of my property line. I'm considering going with a suppressor on that gun when I convert it to an SBR. If the supporessor is integral, I'll only need to tax stamp the suppressor, since the barrel will end up being 16" with the suppressor.

    No, troll. Plenty of people disagree with me on a great number of topics on this forum, and so far, you're one of the only trolls I've encountered. Christ, you're not even very good at it. Are you even trying?
    .
    Dude you have quite the persecution complex don't you. Yes I did assume your pistol was a 5.56 which is why I let you know about the minimum barrel length. But since you went all "the world is out to get me" there is no use in discussing why they have a minimum length. Whatever your hypothetical can might possibly be, it won't be a YHM since they have a minimum of 8 inches for 300blk and my non hypothetical gemtech doesn't have one listed yet.
    .
    And if you want me to try we can discuss your "home defense weapon".... lol
    Time to add FireMarshall Bill to the block list.

  10. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Warbirds View Post
    .
    Dude you have quite the persecution complex don't you. Yes I did assume your pistol was a 5.56 which is why I let you know about the minimum barrel length. But since you went all "the world is out to get me" there is no use in discussing why they have a minimum length. Whatever your hypothetical can might possibly be, it won't be a YHM since they have a minimum of 8 inches for 300blk and my non hypothetical gemtech doesn't have one listed yet.
    .
    And if you want me to try we can discuss your "home defense weapon".... lol
    The Troll comment was addressed to the Troll. "rich kid." That was the purpose for the separation in responses. I have a feeling you thought I was talking to you. I wasn't. I've been addressing that child as "Troll" from the first post he made. If he actually wanted to have a rational discussion, he'd have done more than just toss out insults and wait for reactions.

    Calm down now. All I did was point out that your comment was specific to a particular chambering, and the AR platform has a whole host of options in that regard. muzzle velocity with .300 AAC only drops about 200fps when you go from 16" down to 10" barrel, etc.. some rounds are just more forgiving than others in that regard.

    Now, you mentioned the can. I can show you exactly the can I'm planning to use. I got the dimensions for it from the guy who makes them. It's not exactly 8". It's actually about 7.5something
    Shadow Ops Weaponry. SHDW300-SSC - SERVICE PACKAGE & GIFT CERTIFICATE
    No statement should be believed because it is made by an authority.
    Robert A. Heinlein

  11. #20
    Rich Kid, I did refute one basis of your arguments, that being that Thompson-LaGarde was a 'rigorous scientific test'.

    You're correct: The M16 was not a good weapon as it was introduced in Vietnam. You are not correct: That it is still not a good weapon.

    It, unlike you, has developed. It, unlike you, has moved well beyond its past mistakes. It, unlike you, has come into the modern age.

    Stop living in the past. Discard the old notions. It's better than it was, far better than it was. Acknowledge that or remain shrouded by history. The rest of us, in the meantime, will consider and evaluate what is today and not what was yesterday.

    If you choose not to move forward, I for one will be quite pleased to leave you behind.
    www.inshadowinlight.com
    I don't care as much about making you more "tactical" as I do about making you better able to be the one still standing after the fight is over.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast