Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ What is your favorite firearm and caliber

Posted by: Hero Oct 16 2003, 04:08 PM

What is your favorite firearms and what caliber is it chambered for? There are a great many varieties and sizes of ammunition for firearms today, here are a few of the calibers available today: .22LR, 9mm Para, .40 S&W, .440 Magnum, 10mm Auto, .45ACP. There are some new weapons with ammunition designed specifically for them like the P90/Five-seveN which is chambered 5.7x28mm, which has great penetration up to 200 meters. My most favorites amoung firearms is the Steyr AUG, H&K 227, H&K G36, FN P90, FN Five-seveN, and Glock 18 "C".

Steyr AUG: 5.56x45mm NATO
FN P90/Five-seveN: 5.7x30mm
H&K 227: .227HK
H&K G36: 5.56x45/7.62x51mm NATO
Glock 18 "C": 9mm Para

And here is a link to a real helpful page on Rayguns site if you wanted to know what caliber you specific firearm from shadowrun is. Go to the ammunition section of his site, the look for SR Firearm/Cartridge Table on the nav bar, that will get you to the table with the calibers of most SR firearms.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Oct 16 2003, 04:24 PM

My favourite caliber is the rifle bullet, followed closely by the heavy pistol bullet

~J

Posted by: BIG BAD BEESTE Oct 16 2003, 04:31 PM

Firearms? Over here? Nope, prefer the feel of the good old yew stave. As for ammo, Bodkin, definately bodkin. Teach those oppressive Normans that will.

Posted by: Spookymonster Oct 16 2003, 04:32 PM

What caliber is a fireball?

Posted by: Tanka Oct 16 2003, 04:33 PM

How about some APDS/Explosive. Armor? k, no worries. Punch through and BOOM! What armor?

Posted by: Grimtooth Oct 16 2003, 04:56 PM

M1 Garand .30-06 springfield

Colt Delta Elite 10mm auto

Posted by: Backgammon Oct 16 2003, 05:18 PM

QUOTE (Hero)

REALLY?? HOLY CRAP!!!!

Posted by: Grimtooth Oct 16 2003, 05:28 PM

Do i detect a note of sarcasm?

Or was that disbelief?

Posted by: Cray74 Oct 16 2003, 05:39 PM

In Shadowrun, based on my current character, I'd have to say my favorite caliber is "heavy machine gun." Nothing like an endless stream of HMG lead to make NPC red shirts dead.

After that, I think I tend to get a lot of mileage out of the "heavy pistol" caliber. I'm not sure if it's a "favorite" caliber, but it's definitely utilitarian.

Posted by: TheOneRonin Oct 16 2003, 06:12 PM

Well, do you mean IRL, or in game? Although for me, the two are pretty close.

IRL, I love my HK USP .45 Compact. I've also fired an MP5/40 and an MP5SD6. Those are great CQB weapons. I've trained with M-16A2s more than I care to think about, but they wouldn't be my first choice to bring into battle. I would MUCH prefer something chambered in 7.62 than 5.56. But that's just personal opinion.

In game, my character totes around a .45 USP Tactical, Ares HVAR for CBQ, and a modified M-23 (chambered for 7.62 w/conversion kit for .300 Whisper rounds <thks to Raygun>) with an AimPoint red dot sight.

IRL, I've always wanted to fire a G36C, Tavor, and UMP (.45 cal). I don't much care for the FN P90 or HK MP7. Sure it will punch through armor, but how many round will you need to take down your target? I'm betting on half a magazine. If you need that kind of penetration in a small package, I'd vote for an M-4 or Tavor.

Posted by: Hero Oct 16 2003, 07:15 PM

Sorry about the link, forgot to put it in well here is the link to http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/ammo/navframe.html. Just go to SR Firearm/Cartridge Table link to find out the caliber of the firearms in Shadowrun. I like how Raygun worked the rule, but some of the other players in the group dont like them though they complain about them being overly complicated or something to that effect.

Posted by: Cray74 Oct 16 2003, 07:21 PM

QUOTE (Hero)

I like how Raygun worked the rule, but some of the other players in the group dont like them though they complain about them being overly complicated or something to that effect.

Yeah...I can understand your players' point, even though I've considered "getting detailed" on SR weaponry, too.

Anyway, getting back to your request for favorite calibers...I've never used Raygun's rules before, so I can't really say any of them are my favorites. That leaves me with the default SR "calibers," of which my favorites are "heavy machine gun" and "heavy pistol."

Posted by: Shadow Oct 16 2003, 07:39 PM

QUOTE

How about some APDS/Explosive. Armor? k, no worries. Punch through and BOOM! What armor?

You do know there is no such thing as Explosive APDS?

Posted by: Ed_209a Oct 16 2003, 08:25 PM

Not at smallarm calibers anyway.

I have always taken "APDS" with a grain of salt anyway. I think what the ad calls a "discarding sabot" is the thin teflon layer that keeps the milled steel slug from eating your barrel. If it falls away leaving the barrel, then _technically_ it is a discarding sabot...

WHether is has a plastic washer, or a copper jacket, it's still just a AP round.

Incidentally, the sabots can cause injury on their own at close range. Tank crews are warned not to fire APDS-type rounds over the heads of friendly troops.

I think it's too granular for purposes of a RPG, but there it is.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 16 2003, 09:04 PM

.303 Enfield

.455 Webley

not particularly quick or pretty but reliable as hell and leathal when they hit.

Posted by: Shadow Oct 16 2003, 09:06 PM

I forgot my round,

.308 for Riffle

and .45ACP for pistol

Posted by: Siege Oct 16 2003, 09:20 PM

Interesting trivia -- City of Atlanta PD will be receiving new, standard issue .40 S&W handguns.

-Siege

Posted by: vinsane Oct 16 2003, 09:29 PM

.75 Recoilless Pistol rounds... Still waiting for Lofwyr to give up the info...

--Stainless Steel Rat Shaman

Posted by: otomik Oct 16 2003, 09:39 PM

.22lr in a Bersa Thunder/Firestorm, very fun 007-style plinker.
.357 SIG in a Beretta 96G
10mm in a Colt Delta Elite, colt management is retarded. jeff cooper should get on CZ's case to make a 10mm (just like the Bren Ten but not a failure business-wise).

There are other forums you might enjoy like http://www.thehighroad.org/.

Posted by: Shadow Oct 16 2003, 09:41 PM

Nice, Jimmy DeGriz.

@ Siege a couple of years ago INS commissioned a study that was designed to find the "best" pistol round for federal agents.

The result was a .40 cal, Raygun may be able to shed some light on the whys.

Posted by: Hero Oct 16 2003, 10:04 PM

I just replaced APDS with AP for the smaller caliber firearms like pistols, SMGs, assault rifles/carbine, and sport/sniper rifles. APDS rounds are generally reserved for the large bore rifle like the .50 BMG and and larger and are actually anti-vhicular by nature, that is where you start to see the HEDP and HEAP stuff. Below are some general rules for HEDP and HEAP rounds for rifles that are chambered for .50 BMG and larger.

Payloads Available:::::::::::::::::: Effect
Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot : APDS
High Explosive :::::::::::::::::::::: (Dual Purpose, Fuzed) See Below
High Explosive Armor Piercing :::: (PIE) See Below
Incendiary :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Incendiary Rules
Tracer ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Tracer rules

High Explosive Dual Purpose (HEDP) Rules
This is an anti-vehicle munition.
+4 Power Rating. Non-hardened body armor has absolutely no effect against this ammunition.
Fuse can be set to avoid detonation on impact, in which case the +4 Power Rating is not in effect, and only kinetic energy is used to damage the target. Use the weapon's base Damage Code. As an additional rule, the GM may roll 2D6. On a result of 2, the round explodes on impact, regardless of whether it was set to or not.
Incendiary and/or tracer effects can be added.

High Explosive Armor Piercing (HEAP) Rules
This is an anti-vehicle munition.
+4 Power. Treat as APDS (x0.5 Armor) against hardened armor targets, including vehicle armor. Non-hardened body armor has absolutely no effect against this ammunition.
Incendiary and/or tracer effects can be added.

Posted by: RangerJoe Oct 16 2003, 10:04 PM

You know, you just can't go wrong with a .357 magnum round surrounded by 6 of its closest buddies in a modified revolver with a 6-8" barrel (ie, some kind of Warhawk clone). Yep, it's that 7th powerful round in the wheel that really makes a runner stand out in a crowded runner bar.

Of course, ever since I read the stats on the Kahr P & K series in 9mm para and .40 S&W, I have been drooling over them to the point that they are now standard gear for my new runners. So much firepower.... such high conceal....Like a dream that keeps getting better (until you've exhausted the tiny clip, anyhow).

Posted by: Siege Oct 16 2003, 10:27 PM

QUOTE (Shadow)

The .40 S&W is a happy compromise between the stopping power of the .45 and the controllable recoil of the 9mm.

If I remember my history, it was developed for a State Trooper agency looking for a power compromise between the mankiller .45 and the debatable performance of the 9mm.

Given the local uproar over several police shootings, I'm not sure why the mayor is stepping up the handgun power. Granted, I think it's a step that should have been taken a long time ago but not many politicians are willing to fly in the face of public opinion (misinformed or not) to take such a step.

I may have to go down to the range and try a box of .40 -- I've used a 9mm and I own a .45.

-Siege

Posted by: TheOneRonin Oct 16 2003, 10:42 PM

QUOTE (Siege)

QUOTE (Shadow @ Oct 16 2003, 09:41 PM)

I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the .40 was "invented" as simply an alternative to the 10mm which was being used by the FBI at the time.

The .40 S&W came about in 1990. The FBI was using a sub-loaded version of the 10mm Auto as its standard field cartridge. Smith & Wesson realized that those ballistics could be achieved with a shorter case, allowing for a more comforatable grip in the FBI's issued automatic pistols, which Smith & Wesson also provided.

That's a quote directly from Raygun's site. He does his research, and what I've read coincides with that.

IIRC, it all started with the female agents complaining about the recoil on the 10mm.

Posted by: Siege Oct 16 2003, 11:24 PM

I'm not sure what I was smoking -- but everything I've found supports Ray's information.

http://www.gun-tests.com/performance/sept97s&w40.html

-Siege

Posted by: Raygun Oct 17 2003, 12:00 AM

.22 LR from a Colt Woodsman Match Target all day long.

.22 LR (Remington's Game Load 38 HP @ 1280 fps) from a Ruger 10/22 until the Earth has been thoroughly scoured of small rodents who make ranchers angry.

.45 ACP (200 grain XTP @ 950 fps or 230 FMJ ball) from a 1911, USP Tactical or pretty much any full-size .45 that's put together well.

Lots of cheap 7.62x39mm FMJ or JHP (Barnaul preferrably) from an AKM until it gets boring. (Which usually takes around 500 rounds.)

Cheap military surplus 7.62x51mm from a DSA SA58 until the thought of shooting another round either makes you want to vomit or puts you in debt (again).

.303 British from a Lee-Enfield No. 1 Mk III* at 400-600 meters with iron sights on targets that look a whole lot bigger when they're closer.

.30-06 (Reminton's 180 grain Swift Scirrocco load) from a Ruger M77 MKII upside a big, tasty looking elk with a massive rack that makes you regret shooting it when you have to pack 130-ish pound quarters God-knows-how-many-miles back to your truck. Kind of a double-edged sword, there.

.243 Winchester (Federal's 100 grain Gameking load) about 200 meters to a Pronghorn, through his right lung, his heart, his left lung and breaking his shoulder on the opposite side so he drops like a sack of potatoes and you don't have to chase him all over creation.

And anything else that looks fun.

Posted by: lodestar Oct 17 2003, 03:59 AM

12 guage rifled slugs.

Posted by: Hero Oct 17 2003, 05:21 AM

A shotgun firing a 12 gauge solid slug is not something I would want to be hit with. Do 12 gauge slugs come in different loads like hollow-point, jacketed hollow-points and what not. I can just picture a wound of a hollow-point slug, I would actually start feeling sorry for the poor slag, I would picture that most of the guys innards would be paste in the area hit.

Oh, and here are some of my other favorites.

H&K USP .45ACP Tactical
FN BDA9 9x19mm Para
S&W Model 500/500H .500 Mag
MP5(any variant) 9x19mm Para
Steyr Scout* 7.62x51mm NATO
AMP DSR-1* 7.62x51mm NATO
AI AW50 .50 BMG

*there are multiple calibers for this firearm.

Posted by: Drain Brain Oct 17 2003, 10:35 AM

Walther P99 in .40 with the small 6-volt tactical light, please...

Posted by: Hot Wheels Oct 17 2003, 12:48 PM

QUOTE (RangerJoe @ Oct 16 2003, 06:04 PM)

You know, you just can't go wrong with a .357 magnum round surrounded by 6 of its closest buddies in a modified revolver with a 6-8" barrel

Isn't that the "Colt Python?" Just the thing if you're mugged by a killer whale.

I'm surprised a certain friend doesn't like the 9mm Browning hi-power.

Posted by: Austere Emancipator Oct 17 2003, 02:27 PM

The NSV (12.7x108) and the Tarkkuuskivääri-85 (7.62x53R), since those are the only exciting weapons I've ever fired. The loads are FDF standard FMJ in either case.

In SR, it would have to be the HK Avenger minigun in 5.5x40mm Caseless M43.

BTW, ADSL r0x0r. Good to see the firearms-threads haven't gone anywhere while I was away.

Posted by: Grimtooth Oct 17 2003, 03:28 PM

for more things to drool over checkout

gunbroker.com

Go to categories
click firearms modern
select class III/NFA

droool......

HK fmp 21
at only 11k its a steal
to quote the Punisher
"big, bad, and belt fed"

Posted by: lodestar Oct 18 2003, 12:46 AM

QUOTE (Hero)

A shotgun firing a 12 gauge solid slug is not something I would want to be hit with. Do 12 gauge slugs come in different loads like hollow-point, jacketed hollow-points and what not.

They do. Me and a buddy took apart a refrigerator with a Browning Semi-Auto that was loaded with 12 guage hollow point slugs. Entry holes the size of loonies, exit holes the size of pie plates. Nasty kick too, after a mag of them my shoulder hurt for a week. These rounds would probably inflict massive trauma on someone who was wearing modern armor even if they didn't penetrate. Like beating someone with a sledgehammer...

Posted by: Shadow Oct 18 2003, 12:54 AM

Well my favorite weapon, even though I have never fired it before is the H&K MSG 90. Oh how I love thee....

http://matrix.dumpshock.com/raygun/firearms/sniper/msg90.html

Posted by: Hero Oct 18 2003, 01:20 AM

What would the general rules for hollow-point solid slugs should be. I am sure a solid slug hollow-point would have automatic knock down even if it does not wound. I would say the bonus damage from a hollow-point solid slug would be far higher then a normal hollow-point, maybe +6 power to unarmored targets and +3 to armored targets. Cant find my BBB, what is the base TN for a knock down test from being shot?

Posted by: FlakJacket Oct 18 2003, 01:20 AM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

.303 Enfield

.455 Webley

Not particularly quick or pretty but reliable as hell and lethal when they hit.

You're not fond of sitting round in muddy holes as well are you?

Posted by: Voorhees Oct 18 2003, 06:04 AM

20mm break action pistol. Probably wouldn't work in real life, but what the hell?

Posted by: Zach21035 Oct 18 2003, 07:53 PM

For the record, a Winchester Platinum Tip HP slug comes in at 2,568 foot-pounds - a 400 grain slug at 1700 feet per second. Though it would probably inflict some massive wound channels, it's only about as powerful as a 7.62x51mm rifle. I'd say nay on the automatic knockdown - it won't knock a guy down any better than a normal slug, maybe worse if he's wearing armor since the impact would be more distributed.

Against unarmored targets - I shudder to think. Given shotguns already high damage codes, you could just use normal hollow-point rules. You're already killing what you're shooting at, why go overboard into munchkinish?

Back on topic - favorite guns. In game, the Browning series (Max-Power or Ultra-Power depending on if I have a smartlink) are my favorite pistols and I normally have characters use AK-97s just because it seems more authentic than toting an Ares Alpha. I shy away from submachine guns simply because my group refuses to adopt Rayguns rules (incidentally, mainly because they don't want to accept reduced damage for using suppressors on their assault rifles) and therefore I'm better off suppressing a rifle.

IRL, I love Remington 700s. Having fired pretty much every model and caliber of these things, I can safely say that I think they're the best off-the-shelf rifle on the market. Unfortunately, I wound up selling my .300, so now I just have the .223. There just aren't any places around here to shoot a larger caliber rifle at.

I don't really like semi-autos, but the AR-15 is an exception to that rule. A friend of mine has a top-of-the line AR-15 carbine and loads of technically illegal 30-round magazines (Damn you, Maryland state legislature! DAMN YOU TO HELL!)

As far as pistols and shotguns - Sig Sauers reign as my favorite pistols, the SigPro series is great. I'm also partial to Berettas, both the 92 and 96 series. The Remington SP-10 is fun but painful to shoot, I like the 870 myself. The synthetic model is nice, and I'm considering having the barrel on mine cut down a tad to make it more handy. Since I never shoot at anything more alive than paper (okay, and some trees) there just isn't the need for the extra power.

Posted by: AK404 Oct 20 2003, 03:16 AM

.45 ACP Colt M1911A1 or HK SOCOM

7.62 NATO Whatever, but I'd love to fire a PSG-1.

That's about it, really.

Posted by: Stonecougar Oct 20 2003, 10:41 AM

Well, for RL, I like .45 ACP, .308 Winchester, and 7.62x39mm Russian. In SR, my rigger uses a Marlin Guide Gun in .45-70... an uncommon round in the shadows, but if it'll drop a bull bison, it'll certainly take down that goddamn troll...

Posted by: Hot Wheels Oct 20 2003, 12:48 PM

QUOTE (FlakJacket @ Oct 17 2003, 09:20 PM)

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

.303 Enfield

.455 Webley

Not particularly quick or pretty but reliable as hell and lethal when they hit.

You're not fond of sitting round in muddy holes as well are you?

She could but she'd bitch about the mud on her clothes for two weeks afterward.

Posted by: Req Oct 20 2003, 08:38 PM

At the range this weekend I got a chance to try out an AR-15 chambered in 9mm. I've really only fired handguns before but that was a hell of a good time. Outside that I'm partial to the H&K USP45 and Mk. 23. Kimber .45s are also fun; don't feel quite as nice to me as the H&K but then again, what does?

Posted by: Reaver Oct 20 2003, 09:44 PM

Rifle: I still having a thing for the 7.62x54mm (got 2 rifles in that cartridge).
Pistol: Toss up between 9mm (I love my Steyr GB-80) and good ol' .357.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 21 2003, 01:44 AM

QUOTE (Raygun)

.303 British from a Lee-Enfield No. 1 Mk III* at 400-600 meters with iron sights on targets that look a whole lot bigger when they're closer.

I knew i liked you for a reason. With or without the volley sight?

Flakjacket- I have a real interest in the first world war, but my french is not good enough to get everything from french primary sources on it and after Verdun the avowed french plan was to "wait for the Americans."

I've fired a chauchat but I still hold it's a pig of a weapon. If I'm going to shoot, I want something with a bigger clip and a more even feed than a label. that's the Enfiled. Not as graceful, but in all other respects, a superior weapon.

Hot Wheels, your envy of my wardrobe is showing, that's all.

Posted by: Raygun Oct 21 2003, 06:33 AM

QUOTE (Snow Fox)

I knew i liked you for a reason. With or without the volley sight?

Without. Mine doesn't have one (it's a MK III*) and I've never used one with a volley sight, though I'd certainly be willing to try. Being that it is a volley sight, it doesn't sound terribly useful unless you've got 10 other guys with them and you're all aiming at something at least the size of a car. In my experience, hitting anything outside of around 800 meters with that rifle takes more luck than skill.

Posted by: FlakJacket Oct 21 2003, 07:33 AM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

I've fired a chauchat but I still hold it's a pig of a weapon.

Well when even a quick search and skim turns up such glowing write-ups as 'One of the great engineering failures in the history of firearms' and 'the worst machine gun ever issued to any army at any time in history', coupled with your own glowing testimonial...

Posted by: Hot Wheels Oct 21 2003, 11:57 AM

Oh god! You've got her going on that gun!

I only envy your shoe trees dear.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 22 2003, 02:25 AM

The sole advantage of the chauchat was it's relatively light weight compared with other period machine guns. It's accuracy was ok when it worked BUT, to save money it had to use lebel bullets, which if you've ever seen them, have a real steep drop off between the bullet and the cartridge, it had to have a crecent shaped magazine, which was not condusive to a clean feed. The most infamous element of the chauchat was the magazine, which was open on the sides. You got it, big open slots. The official story was that this would make it easier to get in and clear the jams created by the lousy feed, but in the field this meant that it was way easy for dirty to get in the action, and everywhere else. On a parade ground it works great but crawling through the mud, it was asking for trouble.

Later in the war, and when the French supplied them to the Americans they tried a different manufacturing proceedure to produce them more quickly and what resulted was an even worse weapon not even likely to be accurate when it did work. (like when the Hotchkiss mg was improved. HA! to the Puteax which didn't improve rate or accuracy and was more prone to over heating.) Some "experts" say they believe the chauchat was a great weapon with which men could do great deed, my belief is that only if it was being used as a club!

The .455 Webley by comparison is a wonderful heavy pistol. In the 1920's the Britsh scaled it down to a .38 caliber that was to fire dum dums. The idea being the dum dums would make up for the smaller charges, but then the Geneva convention declared dum dums illegal and the British had already changed their guns.

The .455 is a great gun for hunting the boche! THe .38? Well, it's better than screaming for help.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 22 2003, 02:33 AM

QUOTE (Raygun)

QUOTE (Snow Fox)

I knew i liked you for a reason. With or without the volley sight?

The volley sight was used with great effect at Mons and First Ypres by the BEF.
At Mons the germans reported receiving such accurate heavy fire that they believed they were facing massed machine guns. At 1st Ypres when the smoke lifted what was thought ot be a 3rd wave of Prussian Guards forming up for a charge, was seen to be the 2nd wave, dropped where they stood in their ranks.

There is something about the enfield that just looks reliable. The Mauser may be a great gun, a master peice of the gun maker's art and there's an ellegance to the Mannlicher and even the Lebel has some charm, but the Enfield is a wonderful piece.

Posted by: Raygun Oct 22 2003, 06:14 AM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

The .455 Webley by comparison is a wonderful heavy pistol. In the 1920's the Britsh scaled it down to a .38 caliber that was to fire dum dums. The idea being the dum dums would make up for the smaller charges, but then the Geneva convention declared dum dums illegal and the British had already changed their guns.

"Dum Dums" and all other bullets that "expand or flatten easily in the human body" were banned by the http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/dec99-03.htm. The "Dum Dum" bullet was the first reliable expanding rifle bullet, designed for the .303 cartridge by Cpt. Bertie Clay, at the Dumdum Arsenal in India in the mid 1890s, for defense against the Afridi rebels. But back in the day, "Dum Dum" was a generic term used for any expanding bullet.

Enfield manufactured the .380 British pistols (No. 2 Mark 1) beginning in 1927, but they weren't officially adopted until June 2, 1932. The .380 Webley & Scott No. 1 Mark IV came along 10 years later, during WWII. The .380 MkI and MkII cartridges weren't really "Dum Dums". They were lead hollowpoint bullets patented by Thomas Webley in 1897.

They are good old guns, if a bit anemic by today's standards. Neither of them develops more than 220 fpe at the muzzle. Today's standard is around double that.

QUOTE

Yeah. Takes a lot of guys with bolt action rifles to fool anyone into thinking they're under machine gun fire. Prior to the days of rifle scopes, firing out to 2,000 meters was just an exercise in area denial. Even with a volley sight, at that distance, you could not see a person as more than a dot, let alone snipe targets with precision. So you get ten or twenty guys, have them set their volley at 2,000 meters and the guys being fired at are going to think that they're under fire from a machine gun.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 23 2003, 02:10 AM

I don't think you're giving the Regulars of the BEF proper credit, I didn't think you were French. Their firepower was impressive because the Germans with their bolt action mausers, just as good a weapon, couldn't dream of that level of accuracy and they had far more rifles to throw into the line.
If it was just numbers of Rifles the BEF wouldn't have survived Mons, never mind the running battles that went on until 11/11/14. True the BEF had suffer 80% casualties by then, but it was still nuder arms and fighting and by 3rd Ypres the germans had been ofrced to change their tactics. If it was just volume of fire places like Le Catuea and Nery would have been noted for the British regiments being exterminated instead of holding off vastly superior German armies. Even when they were cut off, like 2 Munster Fusiliers at Etreux or 1st Cheshires at Audregnies, if it was just fire power, the Germans would have rolled over them at 3 to one odds instead of hte 9 to 1 odds the Germans had to bring to bare.
(We can discount the Lebel from the discussion because of it's assanine magazine outlay. I've never had a chance to fire a Mannlicher so I can't comment on that.)

Posted by: Hot Wheels Oct 23 2003, 12:14 PM

Raygun, I did try to warn you guys. You may know guns overall better than anyone else here, but if you go into the First World War, SF's going to get on a serrious soapbox.

Posted by: Siege Oct 23 2003, 01:32 PM

Uh...yeah. Ok.

A little faster on the warning next Wheels, s' il vous plait.

-Siege

Posted by: Hot Wheels Oct 23 2003, 02:10 PM

Hey I warned you guys two days ago!

Posted by: Raygun Oct 23 2003, 11:00 PM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

I don't think you're giving the Regulars of the BEF proper credit, I didn't think you were French.

Snow_Fox, I'm not arguing about the particulars of WWI or whether the British were better soldiers or even better shots than the Germans. I'm talking about how a rifle, in combination with a particular sighting aparatus, was used.

Yes, the Lee-Enfield is a wonderful rifle. That is why I own one. But if you're trying to suggest that the British won the war because their soldiers were using their volley sights to intentionally snipe Germans at greater than 2,000 meters, you're wrong. Inside of about a third that distance, the British could have been wholly outclassing the Germans in terms of marksmanship. But at the distances the volley sight was intended to be used at (1,800-2,700 meters), there are just too many variables involved to allow precision fire to happen reliably and predictably, especially with the technology of the time. Yes, it is possible to hit reliably within a certain area, but that's just what the thing was designed for: affecting an area (say a 10-15 meter radius) rather than a point (a soldier's body). If you need someone else's opinion on the matter, http://members.optushome.com.au/lee-enfield/Sighting1.html.

That said, maybe the British were better soldiers. Better trained, better equipped, better supported. Again, they could have been totally outclassing the Germans in terms of marksmanship and tactics. I don't know enough about WWI to make those observations. But I know plenty about the rifles they used and how they were employed.

QUOTE

Their firepower was impressive because the Germans with their bolt action mausers, just as good a weapon, couldn't dream of that level of accuracy and they had far more rifles to throw into the line.

Mechanically speaking, the M98 Mauser had all the accuracy potential of the Lee-Enfield, if not more, being a much more rigid action. As far as ammunition goes, the British .303 MKVII load (174 grain spitzer @ 2440 fps) may have a had a slight advantage over the German S Patrone (154 grain spitzer @ 2880 fps), but that is very arguable. The British rifle had twice the ammunition capacity of the German rifle, as well as a detachable magazine which could be exchanged very quickly compared to the charging method the German rifle used. With that in mind, it doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to figure out how the Germans would think that they were under machine gun fire under some circumstances.

QUOTE (Hot Wheels)

Raygun, I did try to warn you guys. You may know guns overall better than anyone else here, but if you go into the First World War, SF's going to get on a serrious soapbox.

I guess it's a good thing that I'm arguing about the rifles and not the war.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 24 2003, 02:26 AM

The volley sights disappeared after 1914 when the war settled into trenchs. Now if we accept that the Mauser and Enfield in 1914 were comperable, then it must come down to the something else. If it was just volume of rifle fire, the Germans would have been able to have likewise poured out volley fire and swept away the British. The french army, in their dark blue tunics and bright red pants were slaughtered en mass by the germans(you so don't want me to get started on that one).

The fact the British were able, through rifle fire alone (they had only 2 machine guns for each 1000 man battalion in 1914) to hold off numerically superior German armies, that proved against the French to be competant soldiers, then it has to come down to what was differnt between the british vs Germans as opposed to the Germans vs French. It is those volley sights im the hands of the British Regulars of the "Little red Army."

Posted by: Raygun Oct 24 2003, 07:58 AM

And many other factors besides an auxiliary sighting apparatus, I'm sure. If the volley sights were so darned effective, they wouldn't have started removing them in the first year of the war, would they? It doesn't add up. Certainly the British did something right. But I don't think a little doodad attached to the side of a rifle was of all that much consequence in the big picture.

Posted by: Drain Brain Oct 24 2003, 08:55 AM

QUOTE (Raygun @ Oct 24 2003, 08:58 AM)

<snip>
Certainly the British did something right...
</snip>

[sarcasm] [Snobby Accent]

Darling, the British do everything right....

We're British!

[/sarcasm] [/Snobby Accent]

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 24 2003, 12:41 PM

Raygun, all I'm saying is that your claim that it was just the volume of fire that did the damage doesn't hold up. There has to be something else. The Germans were a tough, capable army which was capable of defeating numerically superior enemies, as shown at Tannenburg. But against the much smaller British army they were at a loss. If it was just quantity of rifle fire, then the Germans would not have been stopped cold, because they could have laid down a similar quantity of fire. The difference must be in the quality of British marksmanship.

The sight dissappeared after 1914 because
1) the battles were no longer being fought in the open as the trenches settled in.
2) there was a shortage of rifles for the "Kitchener recruits" and anything that would speed up construction, like leaving off features, was done. Like the developements in the Brown Bess, from the Long Land pattern of circa1750 to theShort land pattern of about 1775 to the Sea or India Pattern of about 1800. Wheree the design of the gun was simplified without losing accuracy.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 24 2003, 12:43 PM

QUOTE (Drain Brain)

QUOTE (Raygun @ Oct 24 2003, 08:58 AM)

<snip>
Certainly the British did something right...
</snip>

[sarcasm] [Snobby Accent]

Darling, the British do everything right....

We're British!

[/sarcasm] [/Snobby Accent]

Let's not push it dear. My grandfather had a most unnatural, for a frenchman, fondness for the English, which he passed on to me, but lets not go too far.

Posted by: Traks Oct 24 2003, 12:48 PM

I use Russian Vodka, 0.7 l caliber.

Gee, this shows how far I am from geek.
While it is interesting to read, getting into details bores me to death.
Especially arguing about rifle 1 and rifle 2. Duh.

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 24 2003, 01:06 PM

Think of it this way, we're arguing the importance of certain options to a gun.
Raygun is arguing form his experience of handling the gun, I'm arguing the historic facts of it's use.

Posted by: NeO_ZeN Oct 24 2003, 01:30 PM

http://www.metalstorm.com/04_videos/videos.html

Some of you might know about this, so this is for the others.

This is what us Aussies can do.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Oct 24 2003, 05:53 PM

You Aussies live in one of the deadliest places on the planet. Of course you're going to come up with stuff like that.

~J

Postscript: I'm still considering someday moving to Oz. Love that place.

Posted by: Raygun Oct 24 2003, 09:52 PM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

Raygun, all I'm saying is that your claim that it was just the volume of fire that did the damage doesn't hold up.

What parts of "many other factors besides an auxiliary sighting apparatus" and "[the British] could have been totally outclassing the Germans in terms of marksmanship and tactics" are you not understanding?

I did not say that volume of fire was the ONLY reason the British beat back the Germans during WWI. I said that the reason for using the volley sight is, as a matter of fact, absolutely, 100%, volume of fire. Otherwise, the device is completely ineffective. The idea is to create a beaten zone, much as you would with a machine gun. That's documented. You yourself have commented that the "Germans though that they were under machine gun fire". Do you think a single Brit cranking out, at best, about 30 rounds a minute at distances greater than 2,000 meters is going to make a bunch of Germans think that they're under machine gun fire? No. Ten or twenty guys, even up to a full company doing the same thing, that makes a lot more sense. No doubt casualties occurred because of volley fire, but I'm pretty sure, having read from several sources that volley fire was used more as a harrassment technique than anything else, that the numbers involved were pretty low within the grand scheme of WWI.

Now, the British could have been sniping the hell out of the Germans at much shorter ranges using the standard rifle sight. On top of that, there are a lot of factors, many of which have little to do with the kind of rifles being used, that contributed more to the change of tactics than the volley sight on the Lee-Enfield. The use of real machine guns (of which the Germans apparently had more), artillery, chemical warfare, etc...

QUOTE

The sight dissappeared after 1914 because
1) the battles were no longer being fought in the open as the trenches settled in.
2) [to speed up production].

That sounds reasonable to me.

QUOTE

Raygun is arguing form his experience of handling the gun, I'm arguing the historic facts of it's use.

I'm arguing both, actually. If I didn't think you were mistaken about how the volley sight was used, I wouldn't bother to reply.

Posted by: Drain Brain Oct 25 2003, 09:05 AM

QUOTE (Snow_Fox)

Let's not push it dear. My grandfather had a most unnatural, for a frenchman, fondness for the English, which he passed on to me, but lets not go too far.

Je m'excuse, monsieur - c'est ne fait rien! Sarcasme, non?

Posted by: Snow_Fox Oct 26 2003, 05:10 PM

Something about getting liberated from the Nazi's by the Brits did it for my grand father. Silly little things I guess.

Posted by: FlakJacket Oct 26 2003, 06:59 PM

QUOTE (Drain Brain)

Je m'excuse, monsieur - c'est ne fait rien! Sarcasme, non?

Sarcasm? She's American remember. You'll have to start explaining the whole concept of it from the beginning...

Posted by: Drain Brain Oct 27 2003, 11:41 AM

QUOTE (FlakJacket)

Sarcasm? She's American remember. You'll have to start explaining the whole concept of it from the beginning...

ouch...

Posted by: Siege Oct 27 2003, 01:52 PM

Well, yes. But that's only because the American military works.

-Siege

Posted by: Hot Wheels Oct 27 2003, 02:32 PM

Trust me, she knows sarcasm!

Posted by: spotlite Oct 27 2003, 04:51 PM

back on topic breifly - favourite gun has GOT to be the Gyrojet. Packing AV ammo if you can get it, it just rawks.

Posted by: Ed_209a Oct 27 2003, 10:53 PM

Handgun? Glock 21 in .45ACP; M1911-based .45

SMG? H&K UMP in .45

Assault rifle? H&K G36, M16A2/M4, Steyr AUG; all in 5.56. Willing to try a century series AK in 7.62x39.

Sniper? Anything well made from 7.62 NATO to .338 Lapua. Not a fan of .50BMG for antipersonnel work.

AMR? 14.5mm or .50BMG for soft targets. 20x83mm or 25x59 for heavier targets. Laser designator from then on. (with a Paladin 10 miles behind me, or a jet above me.)