Jump to content

General gun info

Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

I made this thread as a place for asking and posting any and all interesting info about firearms and their ammunition. This is meant to get these kind of conversations out of other threads, and to give a centralized place for the people to converse about it. Nothing political should be in this thread, that should remain with the Gun Control thread. Legality questions are not inherently political in nature, so asking what's legal in a certain area is good for this thread. Experimentals are fine too, I love them myself.

 

 

 

Just for reference, this is my personal gun, and a link to it's stats...

 

Ruger_SR40c_laser.png

*9-round magazine pictured*

http://www.ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html

 

I am not an expert, but I love doing research into this subject, so I hope people will ask many questions. The only stupid question is the one you don't know and don't ask. (it's kinda stupid to ask questions you already know the answer to, unless you're confirming)

Share this post


Link to post

Random question: the old PASGT vest, IIRC still in use with the National Guard, without plates. How well will it protect the wearer against pistol rounds, like 9mm FMJ? I've seen tests and know that it stops the bullets (bar repeated hits in the same spot at close range), but how much damage would the kinetic energy do? I've seen some contradicting information about this old surplus, and I'm just curious.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post

If it's not new, drop the rating by 1 level per 5 years... In other words, past about 15 years old, it's worthless against typical personal defense rounds. The same goes for any other soft armor and some ceramic plates. (though ceramic tends to bottom out at around level IIIa rating from what I can gather) New versions would be better protection. It depends on the rating of the vest though as to it's protection... I have found everything from rating I to rating IIIa available online without inserts. (with inserts it goes up to rating III, but never as high as IV)

 

 

The protection rating levels:

 

Level I = This armor would protect against 40-grain .22 Long Rifle Lead Round Nose (LR LRN) bullets at a velocity of 1080 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 95-grain .380 ACP Full Metal Jacketed Round Nose (FMJ RN) bullets at a velocity of 1055 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. It is no longer part of the standard.

 

Level IIa = New armor protects against 124-grain 9×19mm Parabellum Full Metal Jacketed Round Nose (FMJ-RN) bullets at a velocity of 1225 ft/s ± 30 ft/s; 180-grain .40 S&W Full Metal Jacketed (FMJ) bullets at a velocity of 1155 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 230-grain .45 ACP Full Metal Jacketed (FMJ) bullets at a velocity of 900 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. Conditioned armor protects against 124-grain 9mm FMJ-RN bullets at a velocity of 1165 ft/s ± 30 ft/s; 180-grain .40 S&W FMJ bullets at a velocity of 1065 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 230-grain .45 ACP Full Metal Jacketed (FMJ) bullets at a velocity of 850 ft/s ± 30 ft/s.

 

Level II = New armor protects against 124-grain 9mm FMJ-RN bullets at a velocity of 1305 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 158-grain .357 Magnum Jacketed Soft Point (JSP) bullets at a velocity of 1430 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. Conditioned armor protects against 124-grain 9mm FMJ-RN bullets at a velocity of 1245 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 158-grain .357 Magnum JSP bullets at a velocity of 1340 ft/s ± 30 ft/s.

 

Level IIIa = New armor protects against 125-grain .357 SIG FMJ Flat Nose (FN) bullets at a velocity of 1470 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 240-grain .44 Magnum Semi Jacketed Hollow Point (SJHP) bullets at a velocity of 1430 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. Conditioned armor protects against 125-grain .357 SIG FMJ-FN bullets at a velocity of 1410 ft/s ± 30 ft/s and 240-grain .44 Magnum SJHP bullets at a velocity of 1340 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. !!!WILL NOT STOP A 5.7×28mm OR .22 TCM FMJ BULLET!!!

 

Level III = Conditioned armor protects against 148-grain 7.62×51mm NATO M80 ball bullets at a velocity of 2780 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. (this is the typical steel plate armor that you see US armed forces wearing)

 

Level IV = Conditioned armor protects against 166-grain .30-06 Springfield M2 armor-piercing (AP) bullets at a velocity of 2880 ft/s ± 30 ft/s. (ceramic coated steel plate usually falls in this category, and is what is usually used in bomb suits)

 

Level V = CLASSIFIED (yes, there is a rating V, but I can't find any information on it other than 'classified'; I speculate it is something new designed to defeat a .50 BMG AP round)

 

As always, all the impact force still transfers into the body, regardless of whether the armor stops it, so any round over 100-grain will likely knock the wind out of you if it's going around 1000-1200 fps and hitting soft armor. Hard armor will spread the impact more, and reduce the impact felt on one spot, but it still transfers all that energy into the body, and will still knock people down if they get a rapid onslaught of 3-5 9mm rounds.

Share this post


Link to post

How does that whole semi jacketed thing work exactly? And what kind of larger firearm would you(if you actually would) compare to a standard 44. magnum?

I really like magnums so I'm kinda interested in getting one as I hear it's a rather decent sidearm for hunting but I don't really want to buy a rifle as I haven't gotten any training for it and I'm a slow learner when it comes to guns so I would rather replace a rifle with a magnum.Would it be a decent idea or would it be better for me to just get training for a hunting rifle.

Share this post


Link to post
What is your opinion on the unique design of the Heckler & Koch G11?

Are you speaking of the caseless ammunition design, or the weapon design itself?

 

I personally like the idea of caseless ammo. Saves weight.

 

For the weapon itself, it's a box with a trigger. (in other words, ugly) I personally prefer bullpup design. (longer barrel with the same overall weapon length)

 

How does that whole semi jacketed thing work exactly?

SJHP and regular hollow point are really the same thing... Hollow points have the benefit of having the nose expand to make the bullet bigger on impact, (hence causing significantly more damage) but the maintains the regular shape of a bullet while traveling through the air. (far more accurate)

 

And what kind of larger firearm would you(if you actually would) compare to a standard 44. magnum?

If you're talking about comparing a rifle to a handgun, I would never compare them since they are designed for entirely different uses. The bullet shapes are different, the velocities are different, the projectile weight is different... Just too many differences to be able to compare.

 

I really like magnums so I'm kinda interested in getting one as I hear it's a rather decent sidearm for hunting but I don't really want to buy a rifle as I haven't gotten any training for it and I'm a slow learner when it comes to guns so I would rather replace a rifle with a magnum.Would it be a decent idea or would it be better for me to just get training for a hunting rifle.

Using a handgun for hunting is possible, but it's only really useful if you're planning on getting within about 60 feet of your target. Rifles are designed to kill at longer distances, from as little as 20 feet to as far as 3600 feet... Really, it depends on what you want to hunt.

Share this post


Link to post
And what kind of larger firearm would you(if you actually would) compare to a standard 44. magnum?

If you're talking about comparing a rifle to a handgun, I would never compare them since they are designed for entirely different uses. The bullet shapes are different, the velocities are different, the projectile weight is different... Just too many differences to be able to compare.

 

I really like magnums so I'm kinda interested in getting one as I hear it's a rather decent sidearm for hunting but I don't really want to buy a rifle as I haven't gotten any training for it and I'm a slow learner when it comes to guns so I would rather replace a rifle with a magnum.Would it be a decent idea or would it be better for me to just get training for a hunting rifle.

Using a handgun for hunting is possible, but it's only really useful if you're planning on getting within about 60 feet of your target. Rifles are designed to kill at longer distances, from as little as 20 feet to as far as 3600 feet... Really, it depends on what you want to hunt.

 

Firstly yeah It probably was a pretty silly idea to try to compare a handgun to a rifle that's why I put the whole if you actually would in the brackets.

Second I'm mainly hunting game occasionally rabbits and very rarely boars more dependent on the part of my country where the forest's(got a whole bunch of em(that is comparing to the size of the country)) located. Also I guess I should just buy a rifle I'm just cheap I don't want to waste much money on a hobby.also getting a permit is a real pain in the ass in my country(a lot of nut jobs here). Thanks for the advice though.

P.S.

Sorry for replying only now.

Share this post


Link to post

Going after rabbits, use a .22lr. Going after boar, depends on how far away you want to be from the boar when you shoot it. A .44 magnum would be decent short-range, as would many semi-auto/pump shotguns. Longer ranges, I'd go for anything bigger than a .22. (almost anything will do, just don't go overboard with something like a Barret .50) Make sure you're using hollow points if you go for a rifle for boar. (non HP tends to just pass through without killing unless you're a really great aim)

Share this post


Link to post

M-16 uses a 5.56mm bullet, the AK-47 uses a 7.62mm round. Some might consider the AK superior, (and it very much is for reliability) and others would consider the M-16 superior... (and it is somewhat for range and accuracy)

 

It all depends on what you want to use it for, where you want to use it, and how each feels to you when you test it. (each person is different, and some will prefer one over the other for no reason but how it feels in their hands)

 

Me personally, I wouldn't ever take an M-16 over an AK, just because I prefer reliable firearms over almost everything else. (basic functionality for the desired purpose, then reliability, then quality of construction) I just can't get over the issues they had with the original M-16's in Vietnam; the soldiers had to keep 2 rounds less in their magazines just to keep it from jamming all the time.

Share this post


Link to post

FWIW, from the Afghan war onwards the Soviet Army was using AK-74, which shoots 5.45mm rounds. The action is the same as that of AK-47 but the less powerful round gave better control and increased accuracy. The Russian Army still uses it (with some newer minor improvements).

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

Indeed, and they updated it to use the 5.56mm NATO round sometime in the mid-90's... Makes the ammo a lot more plentiful.

Share this post


Link to post

The Galil is a modified AK-47, not AK-74... Galil is a bit more refined design, but slightly less reliable. (can't fire with sand in the chamber like the AK-47)

Share this post


Link to post

Man I wish they still manufactured the FG42(a modified version of course) ,which besides being made of a rare metal got neglected just because Hitler was too dumb to try using paratroopers with good equipment basin on their field performance poorly armed or practically unarmed :(

Do you any guns similar to the FG42?Do you think the FG42 was a good gun for that time?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FG_42 here's a link for the weapons wiki page.

And also sorry for the clustered and poorly organized writing, had a shitty day.

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly, it wasn't worth using the FG 42 when the StG 44 came out... The StG 44 was a superior design, (0.5lbs higher in weight, larger magazines, greater effective range in semi-auto mode, lighter & shorter ammunition, fewer overheating problems, more controllable at full automatic) and that is one that (if it had been invented a few years earlier, and mass produced in larger quantities) could've helped win the war.

 

As far as I know, the only gun similar to the FG42 is the MG 42, and the MKb 42. (which was a preliminary design for the StG 44)

Share this post


Link to post
Honestly, it wasn't worth using the FG 42 when the StG 44 came out... The StG 44 was a superior design, (0.5lbs higher in weight, larger magazines, greater effective range in semi-auto mode, lighter & shorter ammunition, fewer overheating problems, more controllable at full automatic) and that is one that (if it had been invented a few years earlier, and mass produced in larger quantities) could've helped win the war.

 

As far as I know, the only gun similar to the FG42 is the MG 42, and the MKb 42. (which was a preliminary design for the StG 44)

 

But wasn't the whole reason of the FG42 being developed because it was tailored specifically for paratroopers? I'm not sure of this but I think the StG44(I do agree it could have helped the Nazis greatly if it were developed earlier) wouldn't work for paras because it was made from a different material than the FG42. The whole weapon problem and reason for the FG42 being made was that Nazi paras landed only armed with a pistol and had their standard Kr98 and other equipment dropped separately in a large box, because landing with the Kr98 would break their legs.

Btw the real reason I like the FG42 is because of the way it looks.

Share this post


Link to post

The FG 42 was intended for the paras, yes... But as I said before, the StG 44 was only half a pound heavier, and the ammo was significantly lighter. The difference in materials didn't stay different either. (the second version of the FG 42 used the same exact materials and manufacturing methods as the StG 44)

 

If you like how it looks, that's for you. Don't ever let anyone tell you that you can't like it. :) (I prefer the StG 44 personally, but I can see the appeal of the FG 42)

Share this post


Link to post

Dumb question:

My dad gave me a hunting rifle,i can't use it around public areas,but i can fire it in villages.Should i?

 

I really want to.

Share this post


Link to post

Check your local laws. Some towns allow firing in city limits, but they are very few and far between.

 

Should you? Only if you have a really good backing for your target that will prevent ricochets and penetration.

 

Not really a dumb question, I have the urge to fire a couple rounds from my gun into trees around here all the time.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in the community.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.