Ergonomics Adaptation In Firearms

[Maverick]

Dy,

I've read of quite a few instances where European arms manufacturers have modified their baseline weapon specifically to cater to the US market.  The changes have usually been associated with safeties & triggers in the case of handguns & selector switches and barrel types in the case of longarms.

Funnily enough, I remember seeing a tricked up (S&W?) revolver specifically developed for US Spec Ops personnel with a large silencer, day optic & laser aimer.  The thing was huge!

As for the mags, I've only seen M14 mags associated with weapons of that nature (eg M14, BM-59, etc).  That's not to say they couldn't be modified to a bolt-action weapon, after all the SMLE has a detachable magazine.

Regards,

Mav

[dragon]

Smith & Wesson's collabouration with Walther on P99 is another one.  I remember coming across an article on it, which mentioned a few changes to conform to American shooting habits- the only one I can remember, however, is the trigger guard, the explanation being that American shooters don't press their non-trigger index finger onto the front of trigger guard.

In many American Gun stores one may see S&W99s for sale next to Walther P-99s.  Mechanically they are the same gun, and suposedly some parts are interchangeable.  I myself grew up in the Americas and have always used the "american style" side button magazine release.  However the trigger guard magazine release made a lot more sense ergonomically and was safer to the shooter.  I purchased a Walther P-99AS (albeit, between the S&W99 and the Walther P-99AS, I found the Walther P-99AS more aesthetically pleasing among the two).  I find it very under rated here in the US.

[dy031101]

Reposting a picture from another thread:



An attempt to develop a California-legal AR-15 lower receiver (no words on how it went after the mockup, however), but like a fellow forum participant said, it does seem to have the ergonomics of Mini-14 or a classic sport rifle.  Don't know if anyone would have prefered such ergonomics over those of a stock AR-15 out of freewill though  .

Below is a fictional crossbow from a Japanese manga, but the grips do bear quite a bit of resemblance to the P90......

[Maverick]

Really odd looking weapon there Dy, almost looks like something out of a post-apocalyptic movie.  That being said, the recoil from the 5.56 round is neglible, so there'd be no real issue with the devolution from the 'straight line' configuration, especially given the weapon would, I assume, be firing semi-auto.

As for the magna weapon/P-90 collision, it wouldn't be the first time the movies have used 'real' weapons for sci-fi alternates.  Star Wars had MG 42 & Sterlings for instance.

Regards,

Mav

[Cliffy B]

Don't forget the mainstay pistol of Star Wars; the Mauser C-96 "Broom Handle"!

That crossbow up there reminds me of the grip on the FG-42.  Always thought it was kinda "odd"

[dy031101]

As for the magna weapon/P-90 collision, it wouldn't be the first time the movies have used 'real' weapons for sci-fi alternates.

That crossbow up there reminds me of the grip on the FG-42.  Always thought it was kinda "odd"

Maybe incorporate the repeating mechanism of this for added kicks  .

[Cliffy B]

I'm getting "http://www.flapdoodledinghy.com" does not exist.   

[dy031101]

I've been having conflicted feelings about that sporter lower for AR-15......

On one hand I cannot see how it possibly fits my idea of a good-looking gun or how people wouldn't just buy a Mini-14 or bolt-action rifles instead, but on the other hand, I couldn't help to imagine a Mk.12 or other precision-type upper, perhaps even those chambered for the more-powerful 6.5mm Grendel, being put onto it......



=====================================================================

I'm getting "http://www.flapdoodledinghy.com" does not exist.  

Attached here.

Of course, the "relatively quiet" aspect of the crossbow is probably the only advantage it has over unsuppressed firearms.

[Maverick]

The Franken AR is nice enough, but if you upped the calibre, the whole issue of straightline stock vs traditional rifle would come into play again.  You'd be trading accuracy purely for asthetics.  Whilst I realise there are plenty of good, accurate weapons out there with traditional stocks, the recoil impulse is substantially easier to handle with a straightline stock.

Pistol type crossbows are very underpowered as a general rule.  Any potential advantage over a firearm would be, IMO, negligble.  Give me a suppressed Mk 23 or even a suppressed 9mm.  Suppressor or silencers whether they be screw on or QD are a much better option compared to a crossbow.  I think these are really Hollywood things.

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

Well the point is just a repeating crossbow (I posted the picture of a pistol type because it is the first example I found of repeating crossbows  ), the sci-fi picture posted earlier suggesting at least SMG or carbine length.

But I agree, within equivalent handling quality (pistol-type to pistol type, longarm-type to longarm-type) a firearm would be superior to a crossbow.

[Cliffy B]

Just in case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_crossbow

[dy031101]

Check this out!

P90-like ergonomics...... and looks like it chambers the 5.56mm NATO......

[PR19_Kit]

These devices are all ultra-modern from my point of view! 

But from personal experience the ergonomics of a weapon make a huge difference to the accuracy in use, so long as those ergonomics suit the particular user. Back in the '50s I used to shoot with the Combined Cadet Force at school and was a member of our shooting VIII at Bisley and elsewhere for a few years. For indoor and shorter range use we used the ubiquitous Lee-Enfield No. 8, a .22 RF version of a .303 No. 4, the bolt action service rifle that was in the process of being phased out in favour of the FN.

Being really keen on shooting I persuaded my Dad to fork out for a 'proper' target rifle and he bought me a 10 year old BSA International Mk 1, a single shot Martini action weapon. It was a disaster! I was so used to a bolt action that the workings of the falling block Martini ruined my scores, dropping from an average of around 85 to 75 or worse! So during my last year at school I sold the BSA (or rather Dad did... ) and we tried out a few other types. My fave was an Anschutz Heavy Match, but it was way outside our budget and I settled for a Walther Matchmaster, also a bolt action but with forward locking lugs, unlike the rear lugs of the No 8.

My scores almost immediately rose into the low 90s (sometimes......) and I was well pleased. After I left school I kept the Walther and shot for my firm's team in the County Leagues, and I was in the middle range of shooters there. After a few tests of a mate's BSA International Mk III, which had a thumb-hole stock, I carved myself a thumb-hole stock for the Walther and that improved my scores even more. I reckon the almost straight trigger pull with the thumb-hole stock made the release much more predictable, and I used it until I had to sell the weapon in '69. For some reason the Police in Derbyshire, where I was moving to, reckoned that the stock made it too lethal!

[Maverick]

That Magpul PDW looks nasty (and not necessarily in a positive way).  Given the size & weight of the weapon, I really wonder about any sort of controllability in anything resembling full auto or burst.  Specs read as a weight of 4lbs and given that and the barrel length of 10 - 12 inches I'd have to say it'd be rather unpleasant to fire in the extreme.

Regarding target type weapons, I remember using a target rifle at my cadet unit back in the 70s.  It was a single shot bolt action .22 with a pinhole target sight.  Having previously used the L1A1 (FN FAL) on a routine basis with the cadets, the sighting system was horrendous in comparision to what I was used to. 

In that same instance, our instructor brought along his Sterling "AR" type weapon (M16 lookalike) and it was seriously flawed with double feeds in every couple of cycles being the order of the day.

Regards,

Mav

[PR19_Kit]

Regarding target type weapons, I remember using a target rifle at my cadet unit back in the 70s.  It was a single shot bolt action .22 with a pinhole target sight.  Having previously used the L1A1 (FN FAL) on a routine basis with the cadets, the sighting system was horrendous in comparision to what I was used to. 

Mav,

That describes a No. 8 exactly. The standard pinhole sights were way under the class of the rest of the weapon, but with a good set of Parker-Hales mounted it could shoot 1" groups at 50 yards on a good day, and with someone who knew what they were doing behind the trigger of course.