Heck, didn't Germany invent the barrel change in the MG42?

No, the MG-34 also had a quick change barrel. Though don't have any info on earlier weapons with quickly changeable barrels.

Edit: After a quick search the first weapon to feature a quick change barrel system I could find is the ZB vz. 26 adopted in 1924 by the Czech. Not sure if it is the actual first though.

:damn:
:dead:
@ Penguin exclusively and thus in German (allows me more precision, and is irrelevant for this thread's original content),


Von Stöksken auf Hölzken, und alles bis aufs i-Tüpfelchen ausdiskutieren, oder was? Also momentan tötest Du mir a Bisserl den Nerv, echt.

Auf die Artikel von vor drei Wochen, nahm ich keinen Bezug. Mein Opening bezieht sich auf die Artikellage gestern. Fast alle Medien gestern bezogen sich auf teilweis identisch abgedruckte Artikel, die ich deshalb nicht zitierte, weil in der Regel eine deutsche Textangabe in diesem englischsprachigen Forum wenig Sinn macht, der Inhalt der Meldung aber inhaltlich unstrittig sein sollte in der Art, wie ich ihn zusammenfaßte. Die Bild hat es sogar in der Printausgabe gebracht: die Bild hat ein internes Papier der Materialprüfstelle der BW, in dem die von mir genannten, rot markierten Textstellen enthalten sind, so Bild.

Mag sein daß der Spiegel vor drei Wochen ein anderes oder das gleiche Paspier vorliegen hatte, oder nicht. Ich weiß es nicht. Ich nahm keinen Bezug darauf.

Tatsache ist, daß einige Medien gestern auch andeuteten, daß in den drei Wochen sich die Verdachtmomente - so nenne ich sie, weil die Daten nicht direkt veröffentlicht wurden - verdichteten, dahingehend, daß das Problem noch gravierender ist als zuvor beschrieben wurde.

Zu den überregionalen Zeitungen wie Welt, Focus, FAZ und Spiegel, googelte ich im verlauf des Threads noch weiter, stieß auf regionale Kleinzeitungen, die teilweis identische Textmeldungen veröffentlichten wie den, den ich weiter oben zitierte, und auf diverse Blogs von BW Anbgehörigen, BW-Fans, Soaldatenblogs und Militaria-blogs. Dort wurde auf existierende Hitze- und Präzisions-Probleme hingewiesen, von Leuten die durch eigene Angabe und den Stil ihres Posting mir den Eindruck vermittelten, Erfahrung mit dem G36 zu haben und zu wissen, wovon sie redeten, in technischer Hinsicht. Aus einem solchen Blog stammt die Angabe über eine Abweichung von 1.2 Meter auf 100 Meter in heißgeschossenem Zustand. Ich habe das als solches wohl kenntlich gemacht.

Aus solchen Quellen entnahm ich auch, daß das G3 selbst kalt eine lausige Präzision hat trotz des größeren Kalibers (bei der DDR-Armee stand das G3 mehrheitlich in sehr schlechtem Ruf), und daß das MG3 eigentlich sehr gut sei, aber lausig schnell heiß wird - was wohl kein Wunder ist bei der rekordverdächtigen Schußfrequenz in seiner Klasse zu seiner Zeit. Aber das nur am Rande.

Dann das "eine Drittel" und "zwei Drittel". Meine Zweifel an der sprachlichen Schlampigkeit von schreibenden Journalisten gründet sich darauf, daß viele nicht wissen, wovon sie schreiben und sie dazu neigen, komplexe Angaben von Information eines spezifischen Sachgebiets in möglichst griffige Formulierungen pressen zu wollen, und das schnell. Meine Zweifel gründen sich darauf, daß tatsächlich in mehreren vereinzelten Meldungen - in dreien, wenn ich mich recht entsinne - Angaben in Bezug auf "Drittel" gemacht wurden. Nur war es jedes Mal etwas anderes, was gesagt wurde. Mal wurde die Präzision "auf zwei Drittel gesenkt". Mal wurde sie "um ein Drittel" gesenkt. Mal reduzierte sie sich "um ein Drittel". Offensichtlich haben da mehrere Leute was durcheinander gebracht, haben vielleicht sogar eigenmächtig Subtraktionsoperationen durchgeführt, obwohl sie nicht Kopfrechnen können. Was die BW tatsächlich gesagt hat in ihrem Papier, wird nirgendwo gesagt. Was der Spiegel und andere angeben, sind lediglich selbstverfasste Formulierungen, die obendrein widersprüchlich sind. Und alle gestern nahmen auf die Bild und deren vorliegendes internes BW Papier Bezug. Wat solls nu sein, eh? Und über die Testbedingungen - Schußzahl, Munitionsart, Entfernung - wurde in allen Fällen gar nichts gesagt. Es heißt jedoch, daß die 5.52 mm Muni, die die BW momentan in Deutschland ausgibt, ungewöhnlich leicht sei, hieß es in den Kommentaren zweier Blogs. Und das ist der Präzision und Durchschlagskraft, vermute ich, nicht zuträglich, zusätzlich zur übrigen Kritik an diesem kleinen Kaliber. Wie sie's machen, weiß ich nicht, Treibladungen verändert vielleicht. Im Sportpräzisionsschießen, Kurzwaffe, spielt das eine SEHR große Rolle, zumindest das weiß ich zuverlässig aus erster Hand.

Darüber hinaus setze ich aufgrund der katastrophal abgenommen Qualität des sprachlichen Ausdrucks gedruckter Meldungen in Internet- und Print-Zeitungen kein blindes Vertrauen in die Präzision der sprachlichen Formulierungen - zu oft habe ich schon etwas gelesen, und später stellte es sich heraus, daß falsch zitiert wurde, aus dem Zusammenhang gerissen wurde, oder Angaben, über die berichtet wurde, in unzutreffende sprachliche Entsprechungen gekleidet wurden. Manchmal spielt auch eine gewollte ideologisch motivierte Zielvorgabe eine einflußnhemnede Rolle. Leider ist Suggestivsprache in der Zeitung heutzutage genauso häufig, wie der verfälschende verbale Transport einer Information durch mißverständlichen oder schlichtweg falschen verbalen Ausddruck. Daher meine grundsätzlich gemeinte Andeutung, daß der Spiegel in dem von Dir zitierten Artikel von vor drei Wochen, der eine komplexen internen Bericht obendrein in einer irrwitzig kurzen Meldung komprimiert, möglicherweise Vereinfachungen oder Fehlformulierungen enthält, wie sie leider heutzutage überall anscheinend zum täglichen Brot der Schreiberlinge gehören. Das Journalistenhandwerk ist völlig auf den Hund gekommen, die meisten berichten nicht präzise, sondern plappern, oder kopieren unhinterfragt. Die Kooperation von Internetzeitungen macht es nicht gerade besser. Der Text, den ich irgendwo vorher zitierte, fand sich in den zitierten Originalformat in mehreren verschiedenen Zeitungen aus ganz Deutschland! Wenn einer unüberprüft nur vom anderen übernimmt, dann verfielfältigen sich auch die Fehler entsprechend.

So, weiteres Mikroskopieren von allerkleinsten Hölzken-Komponenten bitte ohne meine weitere Teilnahme.


What is needed now is the original report by the Materialprüfungsstelle of the German army, and exact information about the testing conditions and numerical results. Until then we only have the output of some uncaring inkspitters.

Does anyone have information about the claimed cmpaign against H&K? They mentioned in their announcement that they see themselves as victims of such a campaign. Beside the usual demands in germany to always tighten the weapon laws for sport shooters, I am not aware of any such campaign against H&K currently - not by pacifists, and not by business rivals.

I suppose it might be more of an issue in today's standards with our space-age materials and "expert" knowledge of ballistics and physics.

Back in WW2, Most gun barrels would overheat easily. Hence the mainly watercooled browning .30 and the air cooled, easy swap out barrels MG42

In this respect i had respect for the germans in WW2, not their nazi affiliation mind you, but their superb engineering and big scale thinking was awesome in scope and fascinating.

The Germans made excellent weapons. Although their biggest designs, such as the Panther, Tiger II, Tiger 1, and some Tank destroyers were mechanically unreliable because of its incredibly high tech (at the time) designs and huge weight, the Germans had some amazing equipment.

And they make great weapons today. Weapons such as the MP5, MG3, UMP45, MP7, variants of the M16, and so on. Every company has their designs that cant quite perform as well as it should. I dont think that the fix would be very hard, Heckler & koch simply need to solve an issueo f overheating, and the G36 will be even more effective. The G26 is a GREAT rifle, and aside from its slight overheating problems its a fantastic Assault rifle.

Germans still make excellent stuff. And ive told people, that if i had to live in any other country in the world, id probably live in Germany. :)


(Edit, my 1000th post :woot:)

You mean to say that the Germans made many excellent but over-engineered weapons their problem was that they could not let go of all that design in a war of mass production such things hurt you as they make the machine more costly to produce and much more difficult to maintain in the field.Take the both the Panther and the Tiger I both where over designed and the panther was rushed into service a problem that both tanks had where the wheels they had very close spacing bad news in the Russian climes where mud and ice would freeze up these close gaps during the night it was a problem never fully solved and the Soviets took advantage when they could and often they liked to attack in the early morning to take advantage of the frozen conditions in fact the Soviets became masters of night/early morning combat as the war progressed as this was a weak point for the Germans.

The MG42 was a simplified design inspired by the MG34 which was much more expensive to produce in my opinion the MG42 was the best weapon designed by the Germans during the war because it was one of the few that was actually designed with ease of production in mind and actually had more simplified design than what came before it.

The MG3 is nothing more than an MG42 chambered for 7.62x51mm NATO therefore it is not really a redesign more than an improved MG42 think of it as an M16A4 being the end of the line to the M16E1(the first model pre foward assist).the G36 is really an average rifle because it does not perform in a notably superior manner than a current M-16 which sets the standard more or less for modern military firearms.It has the same problem that the M-16 has as well the rapid over heating which is funny because the H&K versions of the M-16 the HK416 and 417 solved the overheating issue of the M-16 design by making use of a gas tapping piston system rather than a gas port system the HK416 is just an M4 with a different upper receiver then bolt and everything else is an M4 in fact the ones that they hoped to sell to the US military where just that an upper receiver kit.

Another sign that few are coming up with something that really changes the game is that the DOD has tested several weapons that are supposed to be much better than the M4/16 yet in tests they prove to only be marginally better and not worth the cost of procuring you can easily just buy an improved gas tapping kit for the M-16/M4 for only few hundred bucks some are better than others I am sure but they reduce the overheating issue alot
and you can install one yourself easily I have one on my AR-15 and it keeps the bolt so cool that you can take it out and hold it in your hand if you tried this with a a regular AR-15.M-16 you would get burned.

The G-36 now its over heating problem lies elsewhere because the G-36 already uses the cooler gas piston set up so the issue lies elsewhere but it does prove that H&K did fail to really put the G-36 through the ringer when they tested it because an over heating problem should become very obvious if it is unreasonably rapid in occurring I bet they knew about it but the German Army had too much faith in H&K due to past history.

H&K makes most of its money on the US civil market(military's usually buy in bulk so the money that pays for research for must gun makers comes from non military buyers who buy at market prices) and guys who think that H&K makes the best guns in the world and are wiling to pay $200~$400 more for their pistol,rifle over just as good or better firearms from other gun makers H&K is the gun that the flashy guy that probably can not field strip his gun and takes his gun to a gun smith just for cleaning owns.

@antikristuseke I only fired the G3 at a military range on a joint training day while stationed in Germany based on my experience there it seemed decent although I condenser the FNFAL its direct competitor to be a far superior design(I might be biased though I do own an SA-58) the bolt operation on the G3 really sloppy to me and counter intuitive I can see it getting fouled easily with dirt as you mention.Funny thing is a G3 will cost you often twice as much as any FNFAL or CETME(Spanish G3 or should I say that the G3 is a German CETME how innovative is H&K really?) you can buy a used CETME for several hundred less than a G3(HK91) and an old FNFAL will run a couple hundred less and now you can buy new SA58 US made FAL for a good price. I have seen chepo HK91 clones go for what a quality made AR or FNFAL or even a Springfeild M1A(M-14) goes for new.

I lived in Germany for 4 years as an American military member I do like the German culture as a whole but as Skybird often says there are alot of problems in Germany more so than the US.I would own a nice house in the woods in Germany and visit it and German friends of mine a few times a year but I would not want to live there and deal with their many current problems.My German friends are more than happy to come to the Us and visit me though when they need a break form the ratte race.

That's very good point.
A lot about guns is branding while army should keep it practical and simple when ever possible.
That is unless it is uber reach army.:haha:

Up to date i have seen a lot improvements in my army service around proven m16 design while new guns usually went through a lot troubleshooting and some became useless.

I think that is why Congress got involved at one time there where several programs going on the SCAR,the XM-8 to name some big ones Congress pretty much said

1.You need to first decide what should be done with the 5.56mm question stay with it and change to a heavier grain round(solid evidence of their improved combat performance going back to 2002 with SOF use of high grain boat tailed rounds)
2.If you stay with 5.56mm you need to pick the most effective design if that means that the current weapon with some improvements fits that bill than so be it.

I understand that the XM-8 program got exposed by another gun maker (Colt or FN) and they where going to also sue H&K in court becuase they did not go though proper DOD testing channels(in other words they found high ranking men that liked H&K and invited them to a BBQ and they shot some XM-8s and with a hint hint wink wink said come see us when you retire might work something out if you get this gun accepted)

I have heard that tests where done by the US Army a few years back and they found that the current M16/4 with composite mags(the STANAG mags have always been a bit lame prone to damage from drop page and spring wear in Nam smart troops only put 27 rounds into a 30 and 17 into a 20 rounder I gather this is becoming common practice again or they buy with their own money better synthetic mags)


On top of that a gas piston system kit can be procured for low cost (if not from H&K) and greatly reduce heating and jamming issues from dirt and filth and many companies also make upper receivers that allow a 6.5 or 6.8 mm round to be used this is useful as a unit could swap out the uppers based on the mission.When your current weapon system can be improved at much lower cost why go to an entirely new one that will take 4 or 5 years to become fully implemented and that is just active duty units in 1990~91 some units still had A1s in common use.These gas piston systems are be made by small American owned companies as well.

Like I said before i think that the German/Austrian/Swiss gun makers are too caught up in them selves they think they are the best of the best and are too snooty to realize that others can and do make as good as and better weapons and often at lower cost.

This is why many hate the AK-47 it is simple and not fancy nothing that does not need to be there.True it takes ideas from other weapons(and those who say that it is a copy of the STG44 know not of what they speak how do I know this the two guns have differing operating systems they are both gas systems but beyond that nothing is similar ) Kalashnikov most certainly was not the only designer that is for certain and there is strong evidence that he put more into the prototypes but due to lack of experiences in engineering others made most of the improvements to make the weapon practical it is not the perfect wepon by any means but it works very well and is very easy to operate even by a poorly trained shooter.

Interesting...that explains it.



I can confirm that it was always an issue with stock m16 magazines that had been designed as disposable(one use) according to my knowledge....uber rich army:haha:
You never pack full mag and they always need to be well checked.:yep:





Ak 47 has big issue when it comes to using attachments and keeping them zeroed in...its becomes very cumbersome.




......

Over engineered, yes. Rushed, yes. Had the russians not been ready to launch a MASSIVE offensive into Poland and Germany itself, the panther might not have been rushed into service.

And yes, the over-engineering turned out to be too cost inefficient for the war. But i cant help but admiring the tanks for what they were. If that panther had been finished, it wouldve been a wonderful tank. It already was a wonderful tank, but to fix its flaws wouldve meant a bigger problem for the soviets.

And, with the MG3, i know its simply an MG42 for a different round. But why take away a design that works? the AK-74 is simply an upgraded AK-47, while following all of its basic principles. If a design works, it should be used to the fullest.

With the AK-74 I agree with you on the MG3 not so much.The MG42 was another weapon that falls into the overrated department (I think that no firearm is perfect all are a compromise in some way) the MG42s big weakness is the high ROF true this can be deadly but at the same time it is an Achilles heal because barrel life is very low with a such a high ROF and in WWII allied troops learned to flank a German MG position get very close wait for the pause of a barrel change and toss some grenades let them go off and rush the position killing any not already dead (this tactic is well illustrated in Band of Brothers in one episode or so) another issue was ammo consumption the high ROF meant that German units had to be very careful not to consume their ammo supply to rapidly.This is why most post war MG designs all of which did borrow some form the MG42 all where designed with a lower ROF.

Also even though the Germans did have lots of advanced designs most troops right up until the end carried the Kar98 that was the most common long arm in the German military during WWII.One thing I will hand to German soldiers is that they where very willing to embrace a better firearm when they found one on the Eastern front many German troops used captured Soviet small arms the SVT40(which inspired the G41 and G42) was a very popular choice as was the PPSH41(they could easily fire German 7.65mm Luger)and the PPS-42 was very popular with Germans as well.

To be fair though the MG3 is not merely a rechambered MG42 it has several other improvements the caliber swap out would go to the MG42/59 some of those where actually MG42s that got re-manufactured.The MG3 can also use different bolts which either increase or lower the ROF so they did it seems feel that the ROF was a little too high in the original design.Alas the MG4 is already in production and it will slowly replace the older MG3 in some roles though not all I am sure as it fires 5.56mm and that round is too light to be effective in an LMG role so the MG3 will be around for a while yet.Of course I look at the MG4 and question what this design can do that the already proven M249(FN MINIMI) can not do just fine maybe it is because the FN is made by sissy Belgians.

You CAN"t use this gun in desert conditions contrary to 7.62 FN that simply shoots.
I have never seen this gun shooting more than few bullets without jamming....went to junk yard.
memories.... lol

Those who say that the PPSH41 could easily fire German 7.65mm Luger know not of what they speak how do I know this the two calibers are totally different and not interchangeable.

Only 7.62 Tokarev and 7.63 Mauser are identical.

From left to right : Tokarev, Mauser and Luger.

http://nsa21.casimages.com/img/2012/...1018722326.jpg

sorry for the semi-relevant text in German, folks; as Sky can't receive any PMs, I gotta put my boring reply in here

Dito, ebenso! :D

Es geht um folgendes:
Wenn wir die Abschreibmentalität anprangern, sollte man zumindest versuchen einen besseren Standard zu halten. Deshalb habe ich wenn, ich mich auf den kürzlichen Bericht beziehe, immer auf die Bild bezogen, ebenso wie in Hinblick auf dem zetilich früheren Artikel der Spiegel die Quelle der Meldung ist. Ich hatte auch eine kurzw Suche im web gemacht, nirgendwo stand mehr drin als in den Originalmeldungen. Nirgendwo stand eine Formulierung, die eine eigene Recherche zumindest andeutet, etwa : "Auf Anfrage bei sowundso erhielten wir keinen Kommentar". Die gleiche Zeit die irgendwelche Schreiber zum umformulieren benötigen, ist die gleiche Zeit die man ebenso nutzen könnte um zum Hörer zu greifen oder eine kurze Email mit Bitte um Stellungnahme an relevante Stellen zu schicken. Deshalb ist es irrelevant wie das Kleinkleckersbacher Dorfblatt eine Meldung abtippt, zumindest solange dieses keine eigene Recherche betreibt.

Aus diesem Grund habe ich auch nocmal nach deinen Zahlen gefragt, weil du mal von 100, mal von 200m schreibst – ebenso mit dem Wert der Präzisionsabweichung, da du under dem Spiegel-Zitat, wo von 1/3 sdie rede ist, wieder etwas von 2/3 schreibst. Das ist keine Haarspalterei, sondern eine Fokussierung auf Fakten. Wenn mich ein Artikel tiefergehend interessiert, versuche ich immer die Quelle auf der sich ein Artikel bezieht, heranzuziehen, bei Straftaten etwas den Polizeibericht, bei wissenschaftlichen Meldunten die Veröffentlichung in Fachzeitschriften oder Thesenpapieren – oder eben beim "Berufen -auf-die-Zeitung welche-die-Meldung-zuerst-veröffentlichte" auf das Originalmedium.

Deshalb ist auch die Quelle der 1,20m Abweichung von Bedeutung. Du hast gesehen, das diese hier im Thread schon mehrfach von anderen Mitgliedern aufgegriffen wurde und ich meine Zweifel habe, das die Person die dieses schreib, einen Beschusstest nach wissenschaftlichen Kriterien durchgeführt hat. Ohne Möglichkeit die Quelle zu befragen, wie das Ergebnis zustande kam, ist es halt nur eine Bahuptung die jemand im Netz schreibt, deshalb meine Frage nach dem link zur Quelle, dann könnte man dort nochmal nachhaken. Übrigens: Originalquellen sollte man ungeachtet der Sprache verlinken, erstmal sind wir nicht die einzigen hier wo Deutsch sprechen tun ;), andererseits ist es im Zeithalter der Internet-Übersetzungshilfen möglich, das sich auch andere zumindest einen groben Überblick verschaffen.

Der Spiegel-Artikel hatte zumindest einige Daten, die wir nicht zwar selber nicht überprüfen können, aber er bezieht sich auf eine konkretes Papier aus dem die Zahlen stammen ("hervorgehen") auch wenn es natürlich journalistisch aufbereitet ist, d.h. der Versuch es allgemeinverständlich zu formulieren. Konkrete Zahlen brauchen und dürfen nicht umformuliert werden, deshalb gebe ich diesen eine Relevanz. Und hey, der Schreiber schreibt zumindest Gewehr und nicht Machinengewehr :yep: - wie so oft schon gelesen wenn es um Sturmgewehre geht. Die Nichtveröffentlichung zumindest eines Ausschnittes des Originalpapiers und die unscharfe Formulierung seitens des Spiegel ist zumindest erklärbar durch den Schutz des Informanten, falls das Schreiben etwa Rückschlüsse auf dessen Herkunft geben könnte - es kann aber auch einfache Faulheit sein.

Wie schon geschrieben hat der Spiegel eine Tradition, das ihm interne Papiere zugespielt werden. Ja, bei der Bild ist es auch so, doch man muss nicht Walraff gelesen haben um zu wissen wie die Bild arbeitet und wenn diesem Blatt Infos zugetragen werden, gilt auch immer die Frage welche Interessen die Person verfolgt, die dieses tut: Cui bono? Gilt es nur eine breite Öffentlichkeit zu schaffen, die die Bild zweifelsohne darstellt, oder geht es darum jemanden ans Bein zu pissen.

Ich stehe der ganzen Sache übrigens neutral gegenüber, ich finde auch das die Junx vom Bund anständige Ausrüstung haben sollen, wenn man seinen Arsch riskiert dann mit anständigen Equipment, wenn also Schmu seitens H&K's, der Bundeswehr oder des Verteidigungsminesteriums aufgedeckt wird: gut so!

So, denke damit is alles jesacht, ansonsten schlage ich ein Duell im Morgengrauen in Arma 2 vor, ich nehme das G36, du das G3 :arrgh!:
Die Darstellung der Optik kommt zwar an die Realität nicht heran, aber zumindest überhitzt die Knarre dort nicht, obwohl an weltfälischen Dickschädeln warscheinlich schon größere Kaliber gescheitert sind :D

Shalom aleikum! :cool:

[/end of kraut lingo]

------------------------

Regarding an anti-H&K campaign:

The only recent event that comes to my mind was when it was reported that the G36 was in use in Libya. It was later discovered that those guns came from a legal arms deal with Egypt, they were all exported with knowledge and license of the German govenment. Both, the manufacturer and the relevant state entities came under fire, but I am not aware of any ongoing campaign.

Alright smarty pants I mixed up two rounds in my head you want a cookie now?
I could not think of the exact round and the Luger round popped into my head.


tilting bolt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oqEGnSW-NQ

rotating bolt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CmrzmNWnQU

Oh and the SVT38/40 had a tilting bolt long before the STG44 was on the drawing board so if anything the Germans took a good idea from the Russians first.It is a matter of dispute but either Fedor Tokarev or Sergei Gavrilovich Simonov but one of the two designed the tilting bolt.Ever gun design most certainly borrows ideas from previous designs it really annoys me when people try to say that the AK-47 is a "copy" of the STG44 when the STG44 itself has parts and ideas taken from other designs just the same not to mention the fact that they are very different in many respects.

My point about the AK and the STG44 being very different in general functionality most certainly stands the AK no doubt took design ideas from the STG but it is no direct clone.Sorry if you disagree with that but you are incorrect in thinking that.

STG44 stripped: http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/fieldstripp/strp_mp44.htm


AK47 stripped: http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/ak/akm/akmapart1024w.jpg

Yes they are just like two peas in a pod.....not!

They have entirely different type bolt operating systems and entirely different the STG44 uses a gas operated tilting bolt the AK47 uses a gas operated rotating bolt.

Now let us look at two weapons that are identical the M-16A2/4 and the Canadian C7/A1 rifle the latter being a direct copy of the M-16A2 but only having full auto rather than 3 round burst(and this of little matter as this is effected merely by a selector switch and sear)

Ar-15/M-4/M-16 all same on the inside :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUWvojbYJVI

C7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYnXjs7oh1k

Now that is what a copy looks like the exact same the STG44 and the AK47 are different the the M-16 and C7 are the exact same any AR-15,M-16,M-4,C7 or C8 they all have 100% identical functionality.

You might as well say that a FAMAS is the same as an AUG if you are willing to say that an AK-47 is a copy of an STG44.

STG-44 take down: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UcdhyMfzgI

AK-47 take down: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ML9a...feature=fvwrel

I like how the Soviets "under engineered" the take down and cut several seconds off and made it so easy that anyone can do it.But they just copied the STG44 right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqhe0C2oCvc

One is older : the Hotchkiss M1909 Benet-Mercie (a French Hotchkiss portative machine gun, chambered not for the initial 8 mm Lebel cartridge, but for the US .30-06 Springfield).

Another firearm with a quick change barrel, older than the ZB vz. 26 : the Colt Automatic Machine Rifle R 75 (A), an improved version in 1925 of the M1918 B.A.R.

I spent some years in the Army, using (and so dismounting and cleaning) many various firearms, French or not, old or recent. By example, I was during 2 months in a German Panzerbataillon (and since, MG3s, UZIs and P1s don't have practically any more secrecies for me).

I handled an AK-47 for the first time in the Officers Academy in Saint-Cyr (which has an huge collection for military instruction) and I shooted an AK-47 for the first time in the Cavalry School in Saumur, and later, in a French Regiment which was using it ...

I was also collector, using my personal collection or friends' one in private, police or public shooting ranges. So I rapidly "discovered", pratically, that the StG44 was not exactly, "inside", the same thing ...

In addition, I had an important collection of cartridges (and the corresponding documentation). I had also specialized in the study of cartridge markings (or of their lack of markings), to know their origins (nationality, plant ...). Very important during the Cold War and the various "local" wars, in order to see who were the ammunition suppliers !

In my mind, "copy" don't mean "clone". Can one agree on the expression "largely inspired by" (as Panther was initially a copy of the T-34, or the Tupolev Tu-144 built from the Concorde) ?

Cheers.

Well I guess that is a language thing as in the US copy means a clone for example the machine that scans papers and prints out those scans we call that a copy machine or a copier.

Sorry for the misunderstanding then it turns out that we see eye to eye it was just a barrier in words.The AK certainly does take much from previous designs as well(you will hear almost as many claim that is "all original" in design as much as you will hear the "clone" pro claimers) Everyone takes ideas from others and then claims them as their own quite often which is always odd to me
as making a good improvement on a concept is often just as viable as an entirely new design.

You do hear many in the US say that the AK-47 is a direct copy or clone of an STG44 when you here guys say this gun ranges all the time and then have to set them straight you kind f react the the "c" word.:D

Funny the entire time I was in Germany I never happened to mention the use of a copy machine with any Germans that we worked with(we where mechanics so no officers or copy machines to be talking about) Actually the German guy I worked with most often would mostly talk about his trips on Route 66 and his days working on UH-1s in the Heer.

You are correct about the Mauser round that is for sure the Luger round always pops into my head for some reason I guess because I relate it to the C/96.
Out curiosity in your time did you come across any of the Swiss Schmidt-Rubin straight pull bolt rifles?I have read and seen photos of these but have never seen one.

AK47 maker bites the bankruptcy bullet

April 4 2012
"The company makes around 90 percent of all rifles in Russia, according to Lenta.ru. Its most famous the AK 47 or simply the Kalashnikov has been a favorite with armies, rebels and smugglers for half a century. However, last year the company made a net loss of over $80 million and its production in monetary terms fell by 45 percent."
It’s newly created rifle the AK-12, which the company spent several years developing, has got quite a cold reception with reports that the Russian Defence Ministry is not going to buy it. The company unveiled the new rifle in February and claims it meets all the modern requirements and is due to be tested later this year.
Another blow for the gun-maker was lapses in security. A local resident bought a wooden box for firewood, only to find it contained new AK 47s. A number of managers at the company were fired over the incident."

A local resident bought a wooden box for firewood...., he met a pretty woman, they married and had 2 kids.

Looks like ak 12 still has all the flaws because the company kept the basic design.
http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog...ifle_2-tfb.jpg

They got rid of the clumsy body side rails and made it sort of flat top.
Problem is that the rails are on top cover which must be removed for cleaning for example....from what i can see here.
It also becomes a bit loose with time....so here goes precision for all the modern fancy stuff one can put on it.
Other than that it looks like cool rifle.







................

The AK-12 looks like an attempt to imitate western features like picatinny rails which they probably imitate as I am sure that the picatinny design is patent protected.The problem for Izmash is that the previous AK where so long lasting and passed out for free for almost 40 years or copies made in block nations they flooded the market nobody needs to buy very many new AKs.

I see that they moved the rear sight much farther back the Finns beat them to punch long ago on that idea.

From what I can find about the AK-12 it sounds a bit crappy first sign of trouble is they added several features like a 3 round burst facility and the charging handle can be moved to the left or right silly concept why make such a complex flip-able charging handle when you can mount an up turned charging handle as on the Galil(this type handle is a popular modification done to western AKs already) it will be able to use a 60 round 4 column magazine bad, bad, bad idea that just increases the odds of the gun over heating.The ak-12 sounds and looks like a POS no Russian solider in his right mind would trade in his AK-74M for one.



More on the bankruptcy and a video on the AK-12 in Russian but you can tell just by looking the thing is poorly designed well the news anchor lady is cute at least.In the end they are obviously bragging about how good the AK-12 is while they show a guy shooting an old M-16A1 and the other fires an AK-74 again and not an AK-12 they are trying to trick a lay person inot thinking that all AKs being shown are the AK-12.



http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...2-was-a-bluff/
Also they are trying to pull a fast one the part with the man heat and cold testing that is an AK-74 the weapon he is shown firing appears to be the AK-12.