2010-12-19, 00:46 | Link #101 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
|
Quote:
The OICW is similar in this basic concept to that of the SPIW. Quote:
Here's the real deal:
__________________
|
||
2010-12-19, 02:35 | Link #102 | |
Superbad
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Armacham Replica Training center
|
Quote:
not to the performance i am bitching, but i find the baby eagle a bit... boxy....
__________________
|
|
2010-12-19, 14:34 | Link #105 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
|
The Baby Eagle and the Jericho are the same exact weapon guys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho_941 Magnum Research is the one who renamed it Baby Eagle for the american gun market. http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Jericho_941 Obviously Spike's was the 9mm version (the 941) I own one in .40 S&W, and it's an excellent pistol.
__________________
|
2010-12-22, 14:15 | Link #114 |
Sleepy Lurker
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nun'yabiznehz
Age: 38
|
...Sounds like a good design. It marries elements from the SCAR, the AR15, the G36 and the AR18 - and it shows in the original design, especially with the handguard and the collapsible, mobile cheekguard-equipped stock.
The use of gas piston is technically a good move compared to the DGI concept, but it carries its own lot of inconveniences (the GP/rod is heavier than DGI and introduces new issues like short-strokes, which sometimes force the shooter to disassemble the upper receiver/hanguard area in order to fix the problem; barrel wear caused by recoil torque sometimes force engineers to implement a heavier barrel design, which results in mobility loss). Otherwise it seems good - what is very interesting is the proprietary barrel ratchet, which allows quick attach/detach and caliber conversion to 6.8mm SPC. They also adopted the XM8/SCAR bolt group concept, keeping it as monolithic and simple (thus more modular) as possible. Since it's quite similar to the M16's, it's no small asset when training is addressed. They virtually left the AR15 button/locks group (mag and bolt release, fire selector) but moved the charging handle to the front, which is excellent since it allows the user to unload/reload while keeping the barrel trained on the target. I heard they had small issues with the CH because rail-mounted devices could interfere with its manipulation, but I can't remembered what they did to fix the problem. The original Masada also could hold a spare AA battery in its handle, which is a small amusing gimmick but potentially quite useful once in the battlefield if you need to replenish electrically-powered optics like Holo-sights, flashlights and so on. It's now produced by Remington as the ACR, giving it a more...boxy appearance and adding a skeleton, fixed butt stock model. The hanguard is more SCAR-ish now. As for performance, I hear it's decent but I dunno about whether it's as good as self-appointed Web pundits make it out to be. I tend to value the word of a guy coming back from Afghanistan and who gets to compare it with weapons he's already fired in anger, over that of a Facebook/YouTube-loving, Oakley-wearing guy who's only fired his gun in an indoors shooting range. Their opinions can sometimes...differ. Significantly.
__________________
|
2010-12-22, 22:02 | Link #116 | |
Superbad
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Armacham Replica Training center
|
Quote:
FN's answer to HK416 and 17 was the SCAR. i dunno since rumors also speculate that spec. ops. use the 416. i mean put it in sand, a rifle's worst enemy and it fires like normal. put it in water, it fires like normal. if FN didnt create SCAR for harsh environ ready, its prolly not gonna go into thar, altho it was said the US Army adopted it.
__________________
|
|
Tags |
firearms, guns |
|
|