Fun Stuff > CHATTER

Dire warnings of the apocalypse mistaken for prank

<< < (21/29) > >>

Dazed:

--- Quote from: Mr. Skawronska on 05 Feb 2009, 19:24 ---I hate fun and kittens.

--- End quote ---

Really though, why are you trying to suck the fun and goodness out of this thread? We're talking about fucking zombies, why should our ideas be grounded in reality?

clockworkjames:
You fire a gun and all the zombies hear it and swarm you and eat you and you die, meanwhile I will be over there in my country with not many guns hiding in a police station or something. Stock a prison cell with enough food/water etc. and the entire cell block could serve to keep you and some friends alive and safe for a year or some shit. It's a prison, people cannot get out and you could make it so people could not get in.

Defeat is imminent and you will get turned into a zombie which might be pretty damn awesome, for all you know the zombies might be all like "Hey dude this fucking rocks! let me bite you and it will be awesome! You get to run about all over the place, hang out with us, take whatever you like and it feels sooo good"

ImRonBurgundy?:
I, for one, would like to see Ed, Edd, and Eddy fight zombies.

Nodaisho:

--- Quote from: Mr. Skawronska on 05 Feb 2009, 19:24 ---The Shrike was mostly vaporware because they chose a poor original location for their factory.  Now that they're down in FL, they've started shipping the carbine uppers for 2500 each and the feed covers (which are currently being shipped to the patient customers who have been waiting 5+ years for the damn things, hence the vaporware comment is not wholly unwarranted, in fact, it is mostly justified) which, once they are caught up with both their pre-orders and the military, will go for another 2500.

--- End quote ---
Good to know. I was sad to hear that the shrike seemed to not actually exist, because it seems like such a good idea. Maybe I'll get one eventually, assuming no banning.


--- Quote ---It's not so much the lightweight concept as it is the ammo concept.  Beltfeds are voraciously hungry eaters.  You might stop ONE mob with three beltfeds, but the sheer amount of ammunition necessary to have in reserve in order to keep those beltfeds running quickly becomes logistically unsound for an unresupplied location.

--- End quote ---
The use of the belt-feds would be best reserved for absolute last-ditch situations while bugging out of your current base. If you didn't have to get out immediately, a molotov cocktail might be better. It just means a flaming zombie, but a flaming zombie is a charred skeleton that doesn't know it yet, and if a bunch of other oh-so-flammable zombies are pressing up against it, you could take out a whole mob with just one cocktail.


--- Quote ---As compared to what?  I wouldn't butt-stroke someone with it, if that's what you mean.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, that's what I meant. I come from the somewhat old school of thought, that says that both ends of your gun should be usable as a weapon. Probably not all that advantageous, in reality, but it is a psychological thing as well.


--- Quote ---If you mean amount of rounds downrange between failures, I've put about 5000 through mine with nary a hitch.  It's a very simple action with a big, heavy bolt and decently heavy recoil spring.  It's a blowback, so no gas system to foul, and the trigger system is STUPID simple.  So from a FIRING standpoint, I'd say yes, it's durable.  From a "Use it as a club" standpoint, I'd say it makes a better wiffle bat.
--- End quote ---
Still sounds like a good choice ammo compatibility wise. If you find a bunch of 9mm ammo, better to be able to use it in a carbine than a pistol.


--- Quote ---The SU-16 has been the victim of a rumor, the origins of which are a bit obscure, as to mean rounds before failure.  Also, it's been inferred that their barrels are not chrome lined.

When I spoke to George Kellgren a few weeks ago in person, he assured me that ALL SU-16 models are being manufactured with chrome-lined barrels and chambers, not just the SU-16D.  Then he showed me.  I'm a believer.

I still wouldn't buttstroke someone with it;  But that's the tradeoff for the weight, the fold-down bipod, the gas-piston system that doesn't crap where it eats, and a reliable action with many of the GOOD points of the AR-15 without some of the more glaring drawbacks.

--- End quote ---
I had heard good things about the gun, but the opinion was pretty prevalent that they wouldn't use it in an SHTF situation, partially for lack of replacement parts, and partially for the amount of polymer. It's funny, we all know that polymers can be ridiculously strong, especially for their weight, but some part of us still wants the old-fashioned durability of metal and wood. The folding bipod is good, though I wonder how steady it would be. Could give a decent challenge for lightweight .223 of choice.


--- Quote ---Because suppressors don't exactly work the way people think they do; They'd be of limited utility in a ZPAW, and they make a barrel you're trying to make shorter for handiness, LONGER.  Many modern suppressors do not require cleaning at all;  In fact, at least one AAC model, the factory reps said, "The dirtier it is, the quieter it is."  Others are of a semi-self-cleaning nature.  Suppressor technology has come a long way since the crude drawings of the Anarchist's cookbook.

--- End quote ---
Very true, at least on the longer and have progressed a lot fronts. Don't know about the cleaning, having not researched them more than making sure they exist for a given caliber, and seeing what decibel reduction you are looking at. With something as short as the 74U, though, longer is a very relative term. At least some designs also mount back on the gun, using some space by the end of the barrel as well as the standard baffles, minimizing the extra space it takes.


--- Quote ---Other than shooting without earmuffs, there are just too few real-world applications for a suppressor for it to be much more than a toy.  But I'll admit that that's my opinion.  And my first suppressed firearm will probably be the converted Ruger 22 pistol with integral AAC suppressor called the Amphibian.  Very nice.  Looks like a long-barrelled Ruger .22 pistol with a bull barrel.

--- End quote ---
Well, I'm pretty sure that I don't want to be wearing earmuffs when keeping an ear out for zombies. I've heard that some electronic ones actually enhance low volume sounds while dulling the loud ones, but I don't know if that is true, and I would want to try them out first, anyway. For me, the idea would be making sure as few others as possible hear the sounds of gunshots. 27-30 decibels of noise drop is making it one ninth or one tenth the volume. Still going to be decently loud, but better than unsuppressed.


--- Quote ---I wasn't even going to go there.  Instead, I was going from the point of view of the 74 SU's short barrel having a detriment to both muzzle velocity (already an issue with the 5.45x39.5 cartridge) and accuracy (especially the shorter sight radius).  A way to get around the shorter sight radius is to go optical, but then that's one more thing to worry about breaking under heavy duty conditions.

And while the 5.45 is plentiful and cheap RIGHT NOW, it IS an imported round, which can dry up with the stroke of a presidential pen.  If you're going to keep it for ZPAW, then no matter how much ammo you get, it is still finite, which means full auto is wasteful.  If you're not going full auto, you still have the velocity issues cutting down on your effective range with a shorty barrel.

--- End quote ---
The sights would be an issue, I would probably have some sort of optic on the gun, and have backups if I could. I don't think the velocity would be an issue out to longer ranges than I would expect the gun to be capable of getting reliable headshots, though. You do have a point about ammo availability possibly drying up, if that does happen, I'll have to change plans for my gun.


--- Quote ---In contrast, I'd recommend a full-length 74 (16" barrel) in 5.56;  I've been very impressed with the accuracy of the Romanian SAR-3's, and a little disappointed in their "remix" the WASR-3.  However, their barrels are ALSO chrome-lined, and with decently adjusted sights to a 25/250 BSZ, or a QD scope setup, could be used as effectively as a 16" AR-15, though a bit heavier but definitely an advantage in the reliability department.  Just remember that the 5.56 version of the 74 uses a slightly different hammer geometry.  The correct hammer can be purchased at Red Star Arms, or, I think also from Tapco.

--- End quote ---
I was thinking a 180B for .223, though I could be biased because of how much I love the looks of that gun. You can get one of the folding stocks from the original 180/18 on there, and a picatinny rail mounted on the strange scope mount armalite put on there. Spare parts could be an issue, admittedly. One thing the various AKs and AR-15s (and CETME/G3s, FALs, and M1As, but those are more than you need for zeds) wouldn't have a problem with. I suppose it would depend on whether I stocked up on spare parts, and had them with me as to whether that would be a good choice.


--- Quote ---I'd also finally like to point out that merely having a gun does not make you armed any more than having a piano makes you a musician;  A tool is useless if you are not able to use it skillfully.

With that, I recommend actual practice with your firearm, a tactical carbine class that includes both technical and psychomotor components, at least one force-on-force class with emphasis on your chosen sidearm, at least THREE bouts in a FATS, and that's just for starters.  Basic Defensive Pistol, Defensive Pistol, and Advanced Defensive Pistol are also excellent courses.

--- End quote ---
Very true, and bonus points for referencing the late Col. Cooper. I do want to go to Thunder Ranch, which I have heard nothing but good about, but that will come in quite a while. Don't know what an FATS is, though.


--- Quote ---Finally, my statement was "Many of you..." when it came to hollywood and television "training"

And I also mentioned that some of you had the right idea in that same post.  Curious as to WHY you thought I was talking TO you when I talked about hollywood and was NOT talking about you when I talked about the right idea.

But no matter.  I've clarified my positions.  And without near the Great Wall O Text, either.

We can discuss logistics further, if you like.  As I said before, SOME of you (by which I specifically include you, Nodaisho) have the right idea, and some well-thought out options.  Those who fall into this category, I am happy to discuss the finer points and make recommendations.

The REST of you who DON'T fall into that category...the cluephone is ringing...pick it up.

It's up to you to decide who's full of shit and who has been there and done that, not me.  I'm comfortable in my preps, and mine are both FOR REAL, and ALREADY DONE.

S

--- End quote ---
Well, I knew you were referring to me when you mentioned the belt-feds. I admit that they aren't practical for just about anything you would be dealing with in zombieland (aside from aforementioned battles with unfriendly survivors), but I just get annoyed by the "No automatic period" rule people quote constantly. Not as bad as when people say you want a bolt action, so you don't spray and pray, but still pretty annoying. Wouldn't use an automatic-only gun, though, if I had a choice. I really don't trust my skill to pull off even pairs of shots, much less single shots.

I assumed you weren't referring to me with the hollywood bit, but it still came across pretty arrogant. Apologies if that isn't how you intended it to sound, text-based conversation is a fickle mistress.

Spluff:
No guys, no.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page