Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Forgotten Weapons" channel.

  1. Actually that would be the most useless part. Much of those old designs required handfitting, because the admitted tolerances were so that, in a batch of supposedly identical parts, the right ones had to be chosen and coupled for the weapon to work. Worse, there was the "cascade matching" problem. When you took, IE, three parts that matched toghether, because they were all at one end of the tolerance scale, and then there was no fourth part that matched with them, because it should have been beyond the scale. It was a so common issue that, for the Winchester .224 prototype (the competitor of the AR15 in the CONARC competition) Winchester explicitly stated that they designed their rifle so that it couldn't happen. And we were in the late '50s. It was still a severe problem for the M60 MG. Modern CNC machines can't work like that. so the modern designer has to come out with his own completely different, set of admitted tolerances. Not to say that steel of the original composition is often unobtanium. The REAL problem is that most of those designs were not that great to begin with. Even the most successful ones, (IE, the M1 Carbine, to say one) were good FOR THEIR TIME. But the eventual purchaser of a modern repro would expect form it MODERN reliability and durability, otherwise "This is shit! The manufcturer scammed me!". For the designer of the repro, it's like a nightmare. To him is like designing a completely new weapon, with the adjunctive constraint that he can't chose the solutions he KNOWS will work flawlessly. He has to keep it consistent with original solutions that he know work "so-so". That's why modern repros mostly dont' have part interchangeability with the originals.
    9
  2. The source was the magazine of the US intelligence. Since it was their work to gain intelligence, my educated guess is that they talked with the Brits.
    8
  3.  @joshualance6005  the M14 gas system is short stroke.
    8
  4.  @PrezVeto  Infact storming a position is not watering it.
    8
  5. @Steve Johnson The 5.56 has issues. Not serious enough to really embark in the logistic nightmare of replacing it, but the Army is looking in new cartridges, to eliminate the 5.56mm - 7.62mm dualism, since its introduction. Had they introduced a cartridge in the 6.5mm range from the start, probably the 5.56mm would have never seen the light as a service round.
    8
  6. In IPSC shooters use the rifles of the manufacturers that make rifles specifically for IPSC. In IPSC pistols, in Europe, about 1/3 of the participants uses Tanfoglio, 1/3 CZ and 1/3 all the others. That's really not representative of the preference of normal buyers. "at the same conditions" means "at the same conditions". In most countries, to buy a rifle, like to buy a pistol, you must have a licence, not compete wth it.
    8
  7. "this is far from forgotten yet, but it would be better if it was".
    8
  8. The Beretta manufactured ones are recognisable by the "old style" muzzle booster (inverted cone on cylinder, not inverted cone on dome). Now that both Italy (mg42/59) and Germany (MG3) are equipping the Ukrainians, it's a way to discern the origin of the MGs you see in action.
    8
  9. Blueing on case hardened parts. Depending on the composition of steel, some turn reddish with time.
    8
  10.  @alessandrorona6205  You are still stating your very personalpreferences. If those are your criteria, you should have listed the Enfield above the Mauser, since it's smoother, faster to cycle, and at least equally reliable and easy to operate. The Mosin is back of the line. In respect to the Mauser, the Carcano M38 has a little rougher action, is equally fast to cycle and reliable, faster to reload, easier to field strip, and lighter (Pretty important, since the rifle has to be carried much more than used).
    8
  11. I approve of this gun. Give Mr. Obregon a medal and a piece of Texas!
    8
  12.  @henochparks  Dont' you feel stupid by typing laughs? Was Ronald Simmons an expert of the Army? Did he testify? Go make your researches first to type idiocies in capitals.
    8
  13.  @henochparks  No limit to your idiocy. I asked " With what kind of instrument the diameter of this hole thad been measured?", because, obviously, to measure a fraction of millimeter, you need an instrument capable to measure a fraction of millimeter. The hole in the scalp (not the bone, the skin over it) had been described at being 6X13mm (not 6.1X12.9mm, or 5.9X13.1mm, but 6x13mm) so, if the killing didn't happen in a bubble of improbability where bullets leave holes of only exactly round numbers, it's evident that they were not measuring the fractions of millimeters. But, further: "As for the wounds caused by rifled weapons, the size of the wound is not always helpful in determining the caliber or type of weapon (pistol, revolver, rifle). In fact, the size of the wound can be misleading (Fig. 8-2). The diameter of the wound may be smaller, greater or equal to the diameter of the bullet. Therefore, one must give a guarded opinion about the caliber of the bullet from the examination of the wound (Fig. 8-3)." (Abdullah Fatteh "Medicolegal Investigation of Gunshot Wounds", Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1976, p. 84) So, if you know nothing about forensic, as it's evidently the case, why are you typing like an idiot, again in capitals like an idiot? (easy answer)
    8
  14.  @henochparks  Had you really read that report, you would have known the wound had been measured on the scalp, the skin that cover the skull bones, not the bones. but obviously, other than not knowing what you are talking about, you read only conspiracy sites. And buy anything. So, again, there's no limit to your idiocy. I asked " With what kind of instrument the diameter of this hole thad been measured?" (not what kind of super-duper-best-in-the-world instruments you THINK the Bethesda hospital owned), because, obviously, to measure a fraction of millimeter, you need an instrument capable to measure a fraction of millimeter. The hole in the scalp (not the bone, the skin over it) had been described at being 6X13mm (not 6.1X12.9mm, or 5.9X13.1mm, but 6x13mm) so, if the killing didn't happen in a bubble of improbability where bullets leave holes of only exactly round numbers, it's evident they were not measuring fractions of millimeters (despite the super-duper-best-in-the-world-oh-my-god-how-fantastic instruments you THINK the Bethesda hospital owned). But, further: "As for the wounds caused by rifled weapons, the size of the wound is not always helpful in determining the caliber or type of weapon (pistol, revolver, rifle). In fact, the size of the wound can be misleading (Fig. 8-2). The diameter of the wound may be smaller, greater or equal to the diameter of the bullet. Therefore, one must give a guarded opinion about the caliber of the bullet from the examination of the wound (Fig. 8-3)." (Abdullah Fatteh "Medicolegal Investigation of Gunshot Wounds", Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1976, p. 84) So, if you know nothing about forensic, as it's evidently the case, why are you typing like an idiot, again in capitals like an idiot? (easy answer)
    8
  15.  @henochparks  You are demonstrating your idiocy again. Had you read the report, instead the conspiracy sites you buy, you would have know that the entry hole had been esrtbilished to be in the back of the head and its dimensions had been measured at the scalp (the skin that covers the skull). Sorry, i don't believe you know anyone outside your mom's basement and you evidently know nothing about terminal ballistic.
    8
  16. Probably more the fact that Beretta outsourced the building of many parts to family workshops in Val Trompia (they still did for their shotguns for several decades after the war). Once the workshop had tooled to produce a part, it was simply not economical to retool, and, since the workshops were labour-intensive family business, the economy in building a part that was intended to simplify mass production was negligible so, along with the mass produced parts built directly by beretta, there was still a continue influx of original M38A parts.
    8
  17. They should have called the next model the "Death Star"
    8
  18. For the Italians, the US weapons had been a liberation... from the British ones. They had not really fought vs the Garand that much (they encountered the GIs for the first time only at Kasserine pass in Feb. 1943, and the Armistice is of Sept. 1943). It had been far more awkward when the Italian Co-belligerent Army had been equipped with the standard British gear in 1944 (they really hated the khaki uniforms and Brodie helmets they had to wear between 1944 and 1953). Then the guys at Beretta really mastered the design, infact not only produced the M1 in 30-06 and 7.62 NATO, but converted it in the BM59 battle rifle. It had to be noted that the Italian Army had been equipped with M1 carbines too, and the BM59 and AR70-90 bayonets retained the same design of that of the M1 Carbine until today (only the ARX 160 bayonet has a new design).
    8
  19.  @TheArklyte  In modern notation, this is an MMG. At that time, it was considered an HMG. When this had been made, the designers knew WWI HMGs, and they knew their many weaknesses (need for water, fragility of the water jacket...). The Breda 37 had not been made like that by chance.
    8
  20.  @Ponen77  Cosmi semiauto, since 1907. They are still manufactured, but very rare. https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Cosmi-RIGATO-Semi-Auto-Rifle-6.jpg
    8
  21.  @FeatheredDino  The BM59 solved the two problems that made so that none of the US conversion was deemed viable. 1) It didn't use the BAR magazines. For the Americans it was too much of a temptation to use the same magazines of the BAR, but they were pretty shitty, and only worked well in the BAR due to the high inertia forces involved in that action. 2) It replaced the bent op-rod of the M1 with a straight one. In bursts the bent op-rod of the M1 acted as a spring causing jams. Other than that, it had a very effective muzzle-brake / compensator that, added to the grenade sight and bipod (that purposedly made the weapon point-heavy) kept bursts under control.
    8
  22. Field stripping it, he said dirt has no many places to go in the action. That had been the doom of many firearms. Work well at the range, but fail in operative conditions, because dirt jams them easily.
    8
  23.  @stealthnoid  That was being outdated? The German army replaced the G3 in 7.62X51 only in mid '90s. The Brits replaced the FAL with the abysmal SA80 only in 1985. The Argentines are replacing now the FAL with the ARX200, still in 7.62X51.
    8
  24. "the rifle can by cycled with virtually zero movement, allowing the sniper to remain very well concealed in his shooting position" The Ross was surely a superb sniper rifle, but the video above disproved this last statement. The Ross rifle has a "long" action (that's a necessary evil for straight pull actions with rotating bolt heads, as part of the rearward movement of the bolt serves to disengage the bolt head from the receiver), that forces the shooter to move his  head, so losing the point of aim, when cycling the action. And this is also the reason why a not properly assembled rifle was dangerous. Even if the bolt was not coming out of the receiver, the shooter would end up with an inch of metal in the skull. Other rifles, as the Lee enfield, or the Carcano, have a "short" action, that allows to cycle it without losing the point of aim. However, for a sniper, this was a minor inconvenient, as he was supposed to shoot a single decisive shot, not to fire repeatedly at the same target in a short time.
    7
  25. The SR2 bomb was filled with 32gr of TNT, into an iron case, and with an iron spiral around it to ensure fragmentation. The explosive filling was inferior to the later (from 1944) US MKII hand grenades, but superior to the earlier ones, so I wouldn't deem them as "ineffective". The bomb was designed to contain it's effects in a 50m range, and so the shooter was instructed to not shoot at closer distances (see "Istruzione provvisoria sull'uso della bomba S.R.2 con governale"). It was not the bomb, simply they decided to ditch the whole idea. It was replaced by the Brixia mortar, that, being able of direct ant indirect fire, and having a far higher ROF, was deemed to be a better solution.
    7
  26. IPSC is growing in popularity. There are official competitions (FITDS is the official federation) more or less every two weeks. AKs, and "black rifles" in general, are legal, but not so diffused, so 5.45x39 ammos available are almost exclusively eastern armies surplus and Russian Barnaul. 15.5€ for 30 rounds, 80.5€ for 200 rounds. Mind that there is a limit of 1500 hunting ammunitions and 200 not hunting ammunitions a private can detain (not a limit to purchase, but to what you can detain at any given moment). However, shooting sports athletes can easily have an exemption (since they have a great consumption of ammos).
    7
  27. Vuk Bozic Yeah, but those pistols were not destined to the whole army. They were used only by the officiers, and not all of them. the Glisenti 1910, and later the Beretta 1915 were chambered in 9mm glisenti. But many officers were still armed with the Bodeo 1888 and the revolver Tettoni in 10.35mm Italian. Many others used the Ruby semiauto in .32 ACP. I would be very surprised if the pistols fired more than half a million Glisenti rounds in the whole war.
    7
  28. +Paul Fabrique It seems like this cause the barrel is "naked" and the frame "goes down" in front of the trigger, but really is not higher than in a standard revolver.
    7
  29. It has little to do with gravity-assisted feeding. Almost all the early magazine-fed auto guns were designed to be used in prone position also. To fire in prone position, bottom placed magazines are a nuisance. For this reason, most of the magazine-fed LMGs had the top mounted magazines, and many og the SMGs until the end of WWII had the magazine placed laterally.
    7
  30. Two in the magazine, one in the chamber. Much countries limits to 3 the number of allowed rounds in shotguns for hunting. You can use more rounds for other purposes. If you need more than three rounds to shoot down a bird, you are doing it wrong.
    7
  31.  @zoiders  Are you abvle to point out any real problem with this design?
    7
  32. "why are you listing pistols when we are talking about rifles?" Because in IPSC, shooters tend to use the weapons of the manufacturers that make them specifically for IPSC. IE, In IPSC pistols, Tanfoglio and CZ make pistols specifically for competition, and so they are the most used in IPSC. What's used in IPSC is not representative of the preference of normal buyers. Most of the buyers of intermediate cartridge rifles does not compete in IPSC.
    7
  33. I get the impression that you simply don't know how a licence for firerams works. FIRST, there are MANY countries were you are not required to have a "sporting purpose" to buy an AR15. SECOND where a "licence for sporting purposes" exist (usually to distinguish it from an hunting licence), it doesn't require you to compete with the rifle. A "licence for sporting purposes" is a licence that allow you to buy and own the rifle, and to bring it to a range WHEN AND IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT. Nobody forces you to attend a range. YOU CAN SIMPLY KEEP THE RIFLE IN YOUR CLOSET IF YOU WANT. So, for how much incredible it may sem to you, there are countries, where, AT THE SAME CONDITIONS the buyers do not necessarily chose AR15s. Some of them choose to buy an AR15, and some of them some other rifle. Because AR15s are mainly a north American thing. And the fact that you think that I'm an "AR-hater" only because I dare to say that, speaks volumes.
    7
  34. Actually the Austrians ended up straigh out copying the Villar Perosa with the Sturmpistole M.1918 in 9X23mm Steyr.
    7
  35. @Trebonius Flonius Think of a Newton cradle. The line here is caseback, bolt, lever, slide.
    7
  36. In the '50s there was no excuse for attaching the bipod to the barrel instead of the receiver. Any quick exchange barrel LMG design already figured at least that out since the late '20s.
    7
  37. It's easy to design a SMG that fires more than 1000 RPM (Already the first one, the WWI Villar Perosa, did). It's actually more difficult to keep low the ROF. 500-550 RPM were considered the optimal compromise between ammo consumption, barrel heating, controllability and effectiveness of the burst.
    7
  38. it's actually a 9mm Glisenti with a shortened case. So much that Fiocchi used the same load for its 9mm Police and 9mm Glisenti cartridges.
    7
  39. More than striker fired this is linear hammer fired. However, without knowing about the timeline, this would have seemed promising but, knowing it's the result of ten years of development, it's still really rough.
    7
  40. The 92 had a frame mounted safety. The 92S, on request of the Italian Police, had a safety-decocker. Beretta put it on the slide because that way the decocker could rotate the tail of the firing pin out of the trajectory of the hammer, and so safely decock the hammer completely (most frame mounted decockers only decock to half-cock).
    7
  41.  @Paladin1873  Maybe you mean "I have never heard a right-handed shooter praise a right-side charging handle, but I have heard many complain about it." Obviously those that speaks are those that complain. Those that are fine with it take it for granted.IE the Beretta ARX100 has switchable charging handle. How many right handed shooters have switched it to the left side to you? On military rifles, made thinking to right-hand shooters, the charging handle is on the right side for two reasons: 1) A right hand shooter mantains the alignment of the rifle with the left (forward) hand, so better mantain the alignment of the rifle, and use the most able hand to reload. 2) If the right hand is reloading, there is no risk of the shooter pulling the trigger until the operation is complete. Infact, when you say "forward for fire, rearward for safe" you are not talking of "intuition", you are talking of what you are used to. For someone that don't practice regularly, "forward for fire, rearward for safe" and "forward for safe, rearward for fire" are completely indifferent. Motion memory are formed through practice, and soldiers practice with their weapons. For someone used to the AK-47, the AR-15 controls are awkward at first, and the AR15 was not a thing in 1957 anyway. The safety on the M1 Garand and on the M14 is "forward for fire, rearward for safe", but at the same time is easy to engage, but not easy to disengage (to push forward that little lever with the trigger finger is really not natural). Many shotguns have a cross-bolt safety but, when a cross-bolt safety shows up on rifles or pistols, many complains about it, not because it doesn't work as well as a lever safety, but because it's not what they are used to.
    7
  42.  Jackie Tearie  Infact, as said, if the gripping hand is reloading, there is no risk of the shooter pulling the trigger until the operation is complete. In general, lefties that use a right hand charging handle (that's, reversed, the same thing) are divided among those that use the steadyng hand to charge, and those that use the left hand, charging the gun from over the top.
    7
  43. Fact is that the CF-98 is not serialized on the frame, but on the slide. Being the frame a rather cheap piece, the Chinese decided that the "important" part, the one that should sport the serial numbers, had to be the slide. In a Tanfoglio Force / EAA Witness too you can easily separate the plastic handle part from the metal frame, and those had been on the market since 1997, but there the serial is on the plastic part. http://i66.tinypic.com/154zmkn.jpg
    7
  44. You can. Long recoil is a great design, and still somewhat relevant, but if you ask to professional operators, like Argentine outfitters, whose rented guns shoot hundreds and evem more than a thousand rounds a day, so any of their guns is used to exhaustion, you can't beat the Beretta 300 series for durability and reliability.
    7
  45. Actually the Austrians ended up straigh out copying the Villar Perosa with the Sturmpistole M.1918 in 9X23mm Steyr.
    7
  46.  @Warptenlololol  It's interesting, but there's a reason if gas action shotguns didn't take off until well after WWII, while there had been a pletora of recoil operated, delayed blowbacks and so on. Shotgun ammos are ineherently dirtier than bottlenecks (go figures at the end of 19th century). Even worse with the gas port so forward in the barrel, and the gas chamber here even contains the recoil spring. I would not be surprised to know that the mechanism was locked by the gunk after about one hundred rounds.
    7
  47. That's what happens when an inventor gets enamored of an idea. At a certain point, he realizes it's impractical in respect to other, established, solutions, but he wants to make it work.
    7
  48.  @bigvinnie3  I'ts used as a vehicolar MG. VERY rarely is used as an infantry MG, exactly for what I said.
    7
  49.  @hendriktonisson2915  The MG34 had been adopted in 1938, and the MG13 was a conversion of old WWI MGs, not a new weapon. The M14 had been replaced thanks to a war. The BAR was surely unsatisfactory as an LMG, but it had not even been replaced in US use by the much better variant FN Mle-D
    7
  50. It's lucky Cobray didn't hire Mr. Osorio. They would have taught him to make turds.
    7