 Carbines vs. Rifles, Any notable differences? |
  |
 Mar 13 2004, 03:30 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 608 Joined: 9-July 02 From: California Member No.: 2,955  |
Aside from IC preference, do any of you have an actual game mechanic to make carbines any more useful than normal assault/battle rifles in game? They suffer a number of negatives, including lower power, lesser range, so on, but as far as I see, there isn't any benifit to their smaller size.
While typing this, I though of perhaps imposing a +1(maybe +2 for extreme situations) on anyone using a large weapon (full size AR and up) in close quarters combat, such as your average corridor, apartment, and so on. How does that sound? I think it's a little harsh, but that's the way the d6 tumbles, literally. |
 |
 
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 05:14 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Following Canon, carbines are either SMGs or Rifles. Depending on which skill is being used, I would rule differently.
So if they are SMGs, they would have any advantages SMGs have(greater concealability, certain attachments being available to SMGs). If they are Rifles, they benefit from at least Sport Rifle ranges or if you are munchkin Sniper Rifle ranges. For example, the G38 carbine rifle benefits from a longer range than a G38 assault rifle since it uses Rifle skill so it has at least Sport rifle ranges. And that's 7S damage with the ability to fire bursts at a longer range. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 05:47 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,598 Joined: 15-March 03 From: Hong Kong Member No.: 4,253 |
Assuming that a 'M-4' version of the M-23 existed. I would assume that it would do 7-8M have a concealability of 3-4, and have a slightly reduced range.
If you don't want to mess with a reduced range, give it 7M and assault rifle ranges. If you can dig up a reduced range right just use the normal 8M. The advantages are moslty having something that hadles mostly like a SMG but that takes rifle magazines, has all the same fixtures (where's the darn safety again?) and will take all the same modifications. Most ARs, especially the bullpup ones are not so long as to merit a +1 (though LMGs and large guns probably would). |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 07:57 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 608 Joined: 9-July 02 From: California Member No.: 2,955 |
Yeah, I'm reluctant to slap that +1 in unless it's a big gun or a really cramped space. Unfortunately I can't exactly slap +1/4 or +1/2...gah, dumb d6 system, how I both love and hate you...
Toturi: It's absolutely idiotic to give a carbine a longer range than the same class assault rifle, unless we're using crazy-ass ammo. Raygun or AE, either of you nuts have house rules? Anyone else too, just would expect you two to be the most likely... Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 08:32 AM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
You know me, D. If Canon says use Rifle range, I'll choose between Sport or Sniper ranges. Or I could go with Assault Rifle ranges for the G38 carbine since that is no carbine rifle range stated anywhere. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2004, 08:50 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 608 Joined: 9-July 02 From: California Member No.: 2,955 |
Well, if I were...ahem...in your situation, I suppose I'd use assault rifle ranges.
I use carbine/light carbine ranges found on Raygun's page, personally. And a lil' less power. Problem is, these two make carbines suck, because there's no benifit. Oh well. :\ |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 08:56 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
Let the user choose which skill to use (SMG or Rifle).
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 11:43 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
I give carbines (as in shortened versions of assault rifles) a slightly shorter range and a slightly higher concealability. Since they don't really have any other positive or negative sides, it comes down to an IC decision, which is great in my mind.
I'm of the school of thought that lowered range is enough to portray the lower muzzle velocity, and lowered damage is not necessary in most cases. Giving full-length long-arms a straight TN penalty for indoor fighting is a bit harsh, and I wouldn't do that unless there really wouldn't be enough room to maneuver normally with the rifle. Giving longer weapons more significant penalties when the shooter is engaged in melee combat makes more sense, but doesn't do much to make carbines more desirable. This post has been edited by Austere Emancipator: Mar 13 2004, 01:19 PM |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2004, 01:44 PM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Canon Companion Group: Members Posts: 8,021 Joined: 2-March 03 From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG Member No.: 4,187 |
Sometimes going by the book, the user doesn't have a choice since there are both carbine (Rifle) version and SMG version of the G38 or the AUG. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2004, 11:18 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 870 Joined: 6-January 04 From: Idaho Member No.: 5,960 |
There is no reality based reason for lowering the power of a carbine version of a full length rifle. There really is no benefit to carbines in the real world expect where handling is critical (CQB), and generally they are less accurate than their full length brethren. Just add a +1 TN at long and extreme ranges, give like 1 or 2 points more conceal and call that good.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2004, 12:41 AM
Post
#11
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Well there is, sort of, to an entent, kinda... Muzzle velocities will be lower with shorter barrels, less energy, less penetration, less damage. Some think that amounts to a point of Power, some don't.
You can of course do that, but unless you want to portray some sort of destabilization of bullets fired from carbines at long ranges, it is more logical to simply cut the ranges. For example, you could just smack the Barrel Reduction and Folding Stock options onto any Assault Rifle and that'd be pretty good for a carbine. The results are pretty much the same -- higher conceal, less accurate/shorter range. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 02:31 AM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 608 Joined: 9-July 02 From: California Member No.: 2,955 |
AE: I'm using your penetration system, would it be fair to say that rounds fired would suffer one worse penetration than a full-size rifle firing the same cartridge?
I figure -1 PEN, Carbine/Light Carbine ranges (Raygun) and +1-3 conceal will do it nicely. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2004, 02:37 AM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Yes there is. Shorter barrel = less velocity translates to less power. You don't have to lower the power rating if you don't want to, but there's certainly reason to do so if you feel so inclined. There's definitely no reason whatsoever for a carbine to get both power and range jacked UP compared to its assault rifle counterpart, which is the case with both the G38 and the Steyr AUG-CSL. That's just plain backwards. M16A2 20" Barrel, 5.56x45mm NATO (M855) Muzzle Velocity: 3100 fps (945 m/s) Muzzle Energy: 1322 fpe (1792 j) Effective Range (Point): 500m M4A1 Carbine 14.5" Barrel, 5.56x45mm NATO (M855) Muzzle Velocity: 2900 fps (899 m/s) Muzzle Energy: 1157 fpe (1568 j) Effective Range (Point): 350-400m M4 Commando 11.5" Barrel, 5.56x45mm NATO (M855) Muzzle Velocity: 2610 fps (795 m/s) Muzzle Energy: 937 fpe (1270 j) Effective Range (Point): 250-300m Generally speaking, in my games, carbine versions of assault rifles get +1 Conceal, range reduced to 350m (here), and -1 Power if the barrel is shorter than 12 inches (300mm). I use the Assault Rifle skill for both, as the differences in using the two are only the range at which targets are usually engaged. Defaulting from SMG gets a reduced penalty (half pool dice only). Rarely will I give assault rifle users handling/manuvering penalties during CQB fights, but I have. Its usually a minor thing, like having to spend a simple action to get a barrel around a door frame or window or something along those lines. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 14 2004, 02:48 AM
Post
#14
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 870 Joined: 6-January 04 From: Idaho Member No.: 5,960 |
The velocity difference from a carbine barrel as a opposed to full length barrel is so small as to be negligable(sp). Trust me if you chronographed a 30" barrel and a 20" barrel of the same rifle it wouldn't be a factor in KE. In fact there is a destablization of bullets at extreme range. The spin enacted on the bullet by the rifling in the barrel slows at long ranges. So this would imply a small amount of destablization, as I planned. Due to decreasing velocity. Shorter barrels also have a different rate of twist on the rifling. For instance a 30" may have 1 in 10 twist while the shorty may have 1 in 8 (revolutions per inches). if you took two of the same rifles, one with a 30" barrel and a 20" barrel, the 30" barrel would be more accurate at longer range (not by much). All things being equal. Again we are talking about small differences here that become more pronounced as distance increases. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 02:50 AM
Post
#15
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 870 Joined: 6-January 04 From: Idaho Member No.: 5,960 |
Im not in favor of jacking up ranges for the record. If anything range could be curtailed but an addition to the target number using whatever range system the full length version is based on would be an accurate portrayal. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 03:07 AM
Post
#16
|
|||||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Considering that there isn't an assault rifle in existence with a 30" barrel, I think we can toss that example out. The difference between a 20" barrel and a 11.5" barrel, however, is significant. A difference of 385 fpe is nothing to scoff at (that's about as much energy as a Beretta 92FS develops at the muzzle). A difference of 490 fps, especially when considering small-caliber, high-velocity bullets that depend very heavily on velocity to deliver a significant wounding effect (by fragmenting), is enormous. Significant fragmenting effects occur up to a range of 150-175 meters with an M16A2 (M855 ammo). With the M4 Commando, that range drops to about 50 meters. That's fine for the purpose the Commando was designed for (targets will usually be engaged with that range), but using either outside of those ranges (much more likely with the Commando) will result in very poor terminal performance, thus target effectiveness, thus the -1 Power Rating. You could get more complex with it, as the drop in power should be much greater than -1 beyond the ranges mentioned. But as a simplicity thing, that's about as far as I like to take it. Straight -1 for the short barrel. I understand if you don't want to bother with more range tables or any more complexity than you've expressed already. If it doesn't mean that much to you, don't do it. But saying that there is no reason at all to do such a thing is, as a matter of fact, incorrect.
This is also incorrect. Barrels have differing rates of twist depending only on the bullet they are designed to fire, not their length. For example, any barrel designed to fire the 5.56x45mm 55 grain FMJBT (US M193) bullet would have a twist rate of 1/12". A barrel designed to fire the NATO-standard 62-grain SS109 bullet would have a twist rate of 1/7" (developer specified; many ballisticians say that's too fast). A barrel designed to fire both bullets would have a twist rate of 1/9" (industry standard). Longer bullets require a faster rate of twist to stabilize. Sierra's 75 grain Matchking requires a 1/8" twist. The sole exception to this is a manufacturer: Colt. All of their 5.56mm barrels, no matter what the length, have a 1/7" twist because that is what FN (developer of the NATO SS109 bullet) specified, and that's what the US DOD (Colt's major client) wanted. This is also true for .308/.30-06/.300 Win Mag rifles. All use the same diameter bullets, but most .308 rifles have a 1/12" twist, no matter what the barrel length because they are designed to fire bullets up to 168 grains (bullets of that length). .30-06 rifles can use the same bullets, but because their case capacity allows the use of heavier (up to 220 grains) thus longer bullets, they usually have a twist of 1/10". Same for the .300 Win Mag. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 05:23 AM
Post
#17
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 870 Joined: 6-January 04 From: Idaho Member No.: 5,960 |
there was supposed to be a "can" in between "barrels" and "also". |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 14 2004, 05:40 AM
Post
#18
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 870 Joined: 6-January 04 From: Idaho Member No.: 5,960 |
Well the same principle applies whether your talking about a 40" barrel or a 10" barrel. But it suits your argument to dismiss it so you ignore simple logic in favor of half a page of crap that you Googled.
Did I say there was no difference? Stop misconstruing my statements. Go out in the pasture and shoot a heifer with two of the same model/caliber rifle; one a carbine and one a full length and tell us how much significant difference there is in how much it bleeds/dies. :P
Again your ignoring simple logic/arithmetic. Did I say that twist didn't depend on caliber? Theorectially: If you have a 24" barrel with a 1 in 12 twist it does two full revolutions. If you have a 12" barrel with a 1 in 12 twist it does one full revolution. Generally the more revolutions the more stable the bullet. Now this isn't true for very heavy bullets but for those that fall under a general Bell curve it is. I've killed almost every huntable (and some not ;) ) animal in North America with just about every round and type of gun generally available. I know the effects first hand and I don't believe it's worth fooling with. But whatever it's your game. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 06:18 AM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 16-February 04 From: Ohio, USA Member No.: 6,083 |
Also remember that some carbines are shorter barreled, short length of pull rifles that are chambered in pistol ammunition. The M-1 Carbine is a nice example of carbine chambered in a heavy pistol cartridge. Many lever actions were made in a variation that was short barreled and chamber in pistol cartidges so that you could carry the same ammunition for both you rifle/carbine and your side-arm. In this case the pistol cartridge actually performs better having noticeably higher velocities then if fired in a handgun. Carbines can 'grow' to that status from either ends, being overgrown SMGs or pint size rifles.
If a bullet left each of the above barrel at the same veloctiy they would both have exactly the same RPMs in flight and would both stabilize the same bullet equally. The longer barrel would not stabilize any better or worst (although it may allow you to achieve higher velocities). You must match the rate of twist to the bullet. It is not bullet weight but the bullets length to diameter ratio and the velocity it is fired at that is used to determine the rate of twist needed to stabilize the bullet. Bullet mass has nothing to do with it. As far as game mechanics I would give carbines slightly better concealability then a rifle and slightly higher power if bases on pistol cartridge or slightly less if a rifle. Since ammo is so generic in the game system the advantage of one ammo for both your carbine and side arm sort of falls through the cracks. mcb |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 14 2004, 06:45 AM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 870 Joined: 6-January 04 From: Idaho Member No.: 5,960 |
Jesus how hard is this to understand: I KNOW RATE OF TWIST DEPENDS ON THE CALIBER. IN GENERAL, RATE OF TWIST INFLUENCES BULLETS IN THIS WAY: THE FASTER THE BULLET SPINS, THE LESS LIKELY IT IS TO PITCH AND YAW. THIS IS TRUE FOR MOST BULLETS, HOWEVER WHEN YOUR DEALING WITH VERY HEAVY BULLETS MORE REVOS DOES NOT ALWAYS EQUAL MORE STABILITY. IF YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE SIMPLE PHYSICS THAN PLEASE GOOGLE SOME HANDLOADING PAGES AND MAYBE THEN YOU WILL BELIEVE IT. Never did I say: "No, twist rate has nothing to do with caliber. It has everything to do with bullet weight". Never did I say: "caliber and velocity are not used to determine twist rate." Seems to be a slight communication problem. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 14 2004, 08:18 AM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 608 Joined: 9-July 02 From: California Member No.: 2,955 |
Okay, wow, calm. Please.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2004, 02:10 PM
Post
#22
|
|||||||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,889 Joined: 3-August 03 From: A CPI rank 1 country Member No.: 5,222 |
Solstice, if you want to make a habit out of writing on forums, you will have to learn to accept the fact that, when you write unclear or incorrect statements, someone usually will correct you. Most of the time, this is to make sure others reading the thread don't get the wrong idea. Sometimes it is to make sure you don't have the wrong idea. Almost never is it an attack against your person. And you have written quite a few unclear and incorrect statements in this thread, and it's a good thing they are corrected.
The principle might be the same, but the numbers are significantly different. Generally speaking (and certainly with the kind of cartridges being discussed here) a bullet will accelerate significantly less between 20" and 30" of barrel length than it does between 10" and 20". Unless you can provide some information on just how much the acceleration lessens as the barrels get longer, using the 30" vs 20" example for this discussion is pointless.
Clearly the logic is far too simple to grasp the facts of the matter, then. You claimed: "Trust me if you chronographed a 30" barrel and a 20" barrel of the same rifle it wouldn't be a factor in KE." However, as Raygun pointed out, the difference between the barrel lengths of 11.5", 14.5" and 20" makes a significant difference in kinetic energy -- averaging an almost 30% drop between 20" and 11.5". Fact weighs slightly heavier than one person's logic. Should also point out that Raygun probably has quite enough literature to back his statements up without Googling anything, unlike amateurs such as myself. And if you don't have something in black&white about the matter, you should Google it anyway, no matter how sure you are.
Even if you dropped the Power from 8M to 7M, or some other 1-point difference in that range of Powers, you wouldn't notice a difference until you'd have shot about a few thousand heifers -- and the results might still be skewed by the other mentioned factors, such as range/accuracy. A fair number of role-players stare at the figures beyond all reason, however, and care about that 1-in-1,000,000 chance (or maybe up to 1-in-5,000 if heavy body armor is prevalent) that the 1 point of Power might decide over their life and death. That's why it's a good idea to try to make all the weapons desirable by the players.
But you did say:
If it is, in fact, very rare for a bullet to be less stable after one revolution, then you were incorrect, and shouldn't get your panties in a knot because you were corrected. Even if it happens more often, it's certainly worth clearing up.
I think I'll just wing Raygun here and say that you might as well drop the Power by one if the barrel is really short. 1 higher conceal is what carbines usually have IMG, and the ranges are about 20-30% shorter, especially at the Long and Extreme categories. In other words, just use numbers you like. :) |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 09:00 PM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 50 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Pueblo Corporate Council Member No.: 2,020 |
I guess this would be a bad time to chime in and comment that carbines were originally created so that cavalry wouldn't have to futz around with reloading a full-lenghth rifle on horseback during a charge. This being said, the range should drop from what ever 'version' of rifle has been converted into a carbine. In modern times, rifles that have been termed 'carbines' have been issued to special forces in an effort to reduce the amount of stuff they are carrying while in the field, since they need to be mobile.
In Shadowrun, this maxim holds true. They're shorter, so they're easier to hide, but still be a longarm. With the advent of SMGs, I don't really see their usefulness, but as in Vietnam, there are some people who like them more. To each their own. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2004, 09:10 PM
Post
#24
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Perhaps you were trying to prove some other point, but in the context of assault rifles and carbines derived thereof (which is what I assumed we were discussing, were we not?) it was irrelevant. Assault rifles don't have 30" barrels, nor do assault rifle-based carbines have 20" barrels. I attempted to inform everyone reading this thread (not just you) that there is a significant difference in energy between the same load fired from a 20" barrel and an 11.5" barrel. I also attempted to inform everyone that with a common assault rifle cartridge, velocity is extremely important when it comes to terminal performance. If you've seen Dr. Martin Fackler's reports on the subject (here and here), you know that. If you haven't, then I guess you're learning something new. Of course, you do have to put this all in context (which I chose to leave up to the reader). Not all cartridges are created equal. A difference of 385 fpe is not much when you consider more powerful cartridges that develop, say, 2,700 fpe or more. Especially when you're shooting at something that weighs 150 lbs. Nor does velocity tend to make as much difference in terminal performance when it comes to using bigger bullets. But as far as I was concerned, that's not what we were talking about. With most modern assault rifle cartridges against a human target, velocity certainly can make a significant difference. It's been well-documented by people like Dr. Martin Fackler of the International Wound Ballistics Association and combat verterans in just about every theater of war since the 5.56x45mm has been put into service. BTW, the only thing I "Googled" (in loose terms; I just went to the Colt site) was the muzzle velocity of the M4 Commando. Most of these things I know from memory because I've discussed them several times before.
No. You suggested it. Be clearer about what you're saying and your statements won't be misconstrued. I attempted to clear this up by saying that yes, there is reason to drop the power of a carbine if you want to. No, those reasons may not matter enough to you to do so IN YOUR GAME. The problem here is not what happens in reality. The problem is how you interpret those things into your game. Don't make statements that are patently false and you won't have to be corrected. It's that simple.
Then don't fool with it. But don't tell me there's no reality-based reason to do it, either. Because in that case you are 100% wrong. Just be a man and admit that to yourself and we'll all get along just fine. This is all a bit off-topic, but I have done a fair bit of hunting myself (I live in Montana). While I can't say that I've used every gun and cartridge generally available (.22 LR, .223 Rem, .243 Win, .30-06 and 12 gauge seem to cover all of the bases just fine around here), I can say that shot placement makes a huge difference in the speed at which an animal is incapacitated. Bullet selection is probably the next most important thing. I've seen animals drop instantly, I've seen them run off for hundreds of yards before they gave up. It would be nice to say that they did the same thing every time I shot, but it isn't true. Probably the most relevant hunting experience I've had to the discussion at hand would be coyote hunting with a .223 Sako 75 Varminter. In my experience, long shots are simply not as effective when using cheap Wolf or Ultramax 55 grain FMJ ammunition. The rifle and ammunition are certainly accurate enough, but an abdominal/thoracic hit inside of 150 yards seems to work a lot quicker than one at 300+ yards. I can't definitively attribute that to bullet fragmentation as I haven't bothered to cut a coyote open at this point, but that would certainly explain how, even after a confirmed hit at longer range, they just kind of run off occasionally, sometimes never to be seen again. However, using soft point bullets seems to go a long way toward evening out terminal performance over range. Again, I haven't cut any coyotes open yet, but I would guess that it is because the soft point bullets tend to fragment better even at long range.
No. Before you made your correction, you said:
Which suggests that in two barrels designed to fire the same exact bullet, the shorter of the two will have a faster rate of twist. That is incorrect. Barrels do not usually have a faster rifling twist simply because they are shorter than another barrel designed to fire the same bullet. Of course they can, and it might help improve long range accuracy (not usually a concern of short-barreled rifle users), but I can't think of a single instance in which manufacturers actually do that, especially when concerning carbine variants of assault rifles.
It does not matter how many revolutions a bullet makes inside of a barrel. More revolutions at the same velocity do absolutely nothing to improve exterior gyroscopic stability.
If you'll notice, you mentioned absolutely nothing about increased speed (velocity) prior to mcb's correction of your statement (quoted above). Perhaps you meant to imply it, but to someone who doesn't know what to infer (the vast majority of the readers of this forum), your statement would be false. Not everyone here knows as much about the subject as you, mcb, Aus, and I do. Therefore, your statements were corrected. Like mcb said, a longer barrel will allow more time for propellant to accelerate the bullet, which means more velocity. Generally speaking, the higher the velocity, the more rotations per unit time the bullet will make, hence better gyroscopic stability. It also means that there will be slightly less pressure from muzzle blast, as that energy, kept in the barrel for a longer period of time, will be converted into heat and motion instead and won't disturb the bullet's stability as much as it exits the muzzle. If you don't believe us, you can read chapters 8, 9, 11 and 12 of the book Understanding Firearm Ballistics by Robert A. Rinker. Again, the fact that a bullet makes two complete rotations internally is inconsequential. The fact that it is moving faster by the time it exits the muzzle is what makes the difference. Again, you are being corrected because you are not explaining these things correctly. Whether you don't know better or you simply didn't take the time to explain doesn't really matter. If you don't want to be corrected, take the time to say what you mean correctly an succinctly and it won't happen. |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Mar 14 2004, 09:21 PM
Post
#25
|
|||
|
Mostly Harmless Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 937 Joined: 26-February 02 From: 44.662,-63.469 Member No.: 176 |
Carbines at least double, sometimes more than triple, the effective range of a submachine gun. They also have much better armor penetration potential. Some are about the same size as an SMG (M4 Commando, G36C, etc...). The downside is that they're quite a bit louder than an SMG. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 11:17 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.