Old Small Arms Revived...... With Some Tweaks

[Fulcrum]

How about a AK-47 version that fires 7.62mm NATO standard roundel?

The Serbian arms manufacturer Zastava has made a version called the M-77B1.

[Aircav]

Infantry Weapons and their Effects (WWII and Korean era U.S. Training Films)

http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=16088

Well worth watching, but remember it is of it era.

[Sauragnmon]

Jacketed rounds don't break up as easily as simple lead munitions would in the wound tract.  This limits the damage in some ways, and makes them easier to remove from the wound tract.  Lead munitions breaking up causes more tissue damage, thus more bleeding, and are harder to remove in entirety leading to potentially more damage even over time.

[rickshaw]

How about a AK-47 version that fires 7.62mm NATO standard roundel?

The Serbian arms manufacturer Zastava has made a version called the M-77B1.

I found this one in a group of Dragunovs -- and it does kind of look like one once scoped. So, the easy way to do this is to 're-militarize' a Medved, the commercial version of the Dragunov SVD chambered for 7.62x51 NATO (or one of the Norinco NDM-86 or Cugir PSL rip-offs).

In effect, you're reinventing the FN FAL the hard way ... but it'd be do-able. Probably simpler to talk to Knight or one of the other makers of 7.62x51 AR-15 derivatives.

Except of course you don't end up inheriting all the associated problems of the AR-15/M16 family with their atrocious Llungmann gas system.

[Cliffy B]

Except of course you don't end up inheriting all the associated problems of the AR-15/M16 family with their atrocious Llungmann gas system.

If you don't want the stock gas system then go with the HK-416/417.  They re-did the gas system and according to them its ridiculously reliable now.  The 416 is 5.56 and the 417 is 7.62.

[Weaver]

How about a AK-47 version that fires 7.62mm NATO standard roundel?

The Serbian arms manufacturer Zastava has made a version called the M-77B1.

I found this one in a group of Dragunovs -- and it does kind of look like one once scoped. So, the easy way to do this is to 're-militarize' a Medved, the commercial version of the Dragunov SVD chambered for 7.62x51 NATO (or one of the Norinco NDM-86 or Cugir PSL rip-offs).

In effect, you're reinventing the FN FAL the hard way ... but it'd be do-able. Probably simpler to talk to Knight or one of the other makers of 7.62x51 AR-15 derivatives.

Except of course you don't end up inheriting all the associated problems of the AR-15/M16 family with their atrocious Llungmann gas system.

Some of the AR-15 semi-clones replace the direct impingement gas system with a conventional piston and rod setup.

[rickshaw]

[private rant on/]
Gah!  "Battle Rifle"?  Can't stand the term.     Its an American invention.  If the rifle is a selective fire, self-loading rifle capable of fully-automatic fire it is an "assault rifle" as it was defined after WWII.  There was and is no difference between weapons of different calibre.  Why? 'cause the defining point was a weapon capable of fully-automatic fire!  Something other rifles which preceded it didn't have.

Its like Brassey's attempt to redefine the RCL as a "fire and forget unguided missile launcher" in the 1970s.       An unnecessary complicated definition.
[/private rant off]

Excuse me.  Just had to get that off my chest...

[sotoolslinger]

I was told that for blackpower revolvers, lead bullets are the standard since the gun rifling isn't meant to grip the harder metals of jacketed rounds used in smokeless powder firearms.

Now I got that answer from a question motivated by early revolvers, which used seperate bullet and blackpowder load or paper cartridges...... is the above statement equally applicable to metallic blackpowder cartridges?  Or can I, for example, take the bullet of a .44 Special (a smokeless) and outfit it to a .44 Russian (a blackpowder)?

Thanks in advance.

Yep. The .44 Special is just the Russian lenthened 10 of an inch or so. You can use .44 Russians in a gun chambered for .44 Special. The Cowboy Action shooters have influenced several manufactures to load .44 Russian ammo.
HOWEVER if you are shooting an ORIGINAL .44 Russsian I would advise against using any copper jacket bullet or smokeless powder load.
If it is a modern reproduction you can go to town.

[dy031101]

Well some might argue that G3 isn't that old, but still......

I remember reading a magazine article about it a while ago, and browsing the Wikipedia seem to have suggested a couple of interesting variants, too.

Has anyone tried this family of guns?

Out of curiosity I have a couple of additional questions:

Has anyone been exposed to the "Super Sniper" variant?  Would it really be comparable or close to sniper or designated marksman variant of HK41/91 or even G3 itself?

Which one does the HK32, chamber for the 7.62mm x 39, have a higher parts commonality with: G3 or HK33?  Does the same hold true for the PTR-32 with respect to the rest of the PTR-91 family?

Thanks in advance.

[Aircav]

I've fired the G3 version before in the past and wasn't overly impressed especially if you use the sling as a sling, as you can move the point of impact by up to 6 inches at 100 yds depending how much pressure you put on it.

[sotoolslinger]

The PTR sniper setups are supposed to have free floated barrels so sling tension should not be an issue .The Original G3 and HK 91/93 are nice weapons but suffer from the same problems as the AR family. They are suberbly and finely machined so don't let them get dirty.

[rickshaw]

I've fired the G3 version before in the past and wasn't overly impressed especially if you use the sling as a sling, as you can move the point of impact by up to 6 inches at 100 yds depending how much pressure you put on it.

I assume you mean "use the sling as a brace"?

[Aircav]

I've fired the G3 version before in the past and wasn't overly impressed especially if you use the sling as a sling, as you can move the point of impact by up to 6 inches at 100 yds depending how much pressure you put on it.

I assume you mean "use the sling as a brace"?

Using the sling as a sling and not a carrying strap.

[rickshaw]

I've fired the G3 version before in the past and wasn't overly impressed especially if you use the sling as a sling, as you can move the point of impact by up to 6 inches at 100 yds depending how much pressure you put on it.

I assume you mean "use the sling as a brace"?

Using the sling as a sling and not a carrying strap.

I believe we are encountering that problem Mr. Churchill suggested existed about the British Empire and the United States being "divided by a common language".  In Commonwealth armies, slings are usually utilised only as "carrying straps" for firearms (and in the Australian Army, only placed on the weapon during (a) ceremonial occasions and (b) when in the field the user requires both hands free when carrying something other than their weapon).  I am aware that in the US military, they are also utilised to brace the weapon and firer, when firing a rifle.  Is that what you're suggesting?

[dragon]

I've fired the G3 version before in the past and wasn't overly impressed especially if you use the sling as a sling, as you can move the point of impact by up to 6 inches at 100 yds depending how much pressure you put on it.

I assume you mean "use the sling as a brace"?

Using the sling as a sling and not a carrying strap.

I believe we are encountering that problem Mr. Churchill suggested existed about the British Empire and the United States being "divided by a common language".  In Commonwealth armies, slings are usually utilised only as "carrying straps" for firearms (and in the Australian Army, only placed on the weapon during (a) ceremonial occasions and (b) when in the field the user requires both hands free when carrying something other than their weapon).  I am aware that in the US military, they are also utilised to brace the weapon and firer, when firing a rifle.  Is that what you're suggesting?

A picture is worth a thousand words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omVGgJVtzb8
This?