- This topic has 11 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The first two weapons are not rifles. A requirement to be considered a rifle is actually having a rifled barrel and neither musket did. The SCAR is an even bigger piece of garbage than the cancelled XM-8 and I fully expect it to cancelled as well but only after millions are wasted. Gas-operated military weapons are on the way out because the resent too many fouling issues.Other than that, it is a pretty neat graphic.
Some are missing:- FN FAL- FN F2000- FN P90and much more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Herstal
Well, I'm guessing the author of the infographic was using the following dictionary definition of “rifle”:”a gun that has a long barrel and that is held against your shoulder when you shoot it”and not this other definition:”a shoulder weapon with a rifled bore”I thought that the “How they compare” section was quite interesting. I have heard that the M-16 was not as reliable as something like the AK-47, but when working the technology seems to have been advanced for its time.
I have used both M-16's and AK-47s and I would take and M-16 every day of the week. The AK is rugged and easy to use. It is also a piece of garbage that is very difficult to hit anything with because it is so inaccurate. I fully encourage rebels the world over to use AKs because while they are engaging in spray and pray I and my buddies will be picking them off with aimed fire. It does not matter how many rounds per minute you can ire or how big an idiot can use a weapon if you cannot hit anything with it in the first place. Then again, marksmanship is a dying skill even within the US military.
So then why did the AK become so popular? Was it simply due to cost? Also, what ever happened to the Heckler & Koch guns that I thought would be more popular in the U.S.?
It became so popular because of cost and because the Communists flooded the world with them. I believe the AK-47 is the most produced rifle in world history with something in excess of 100 million different variants being produced all over the world.
Are you saying that because it doesn't take into account the diversity of rifles made over the past few centuries? Probably just because the site that made the infographic is based in the U.S. I imagine that if they made a true timeline, the list would be excessively long.
I would argue that none of these weapons has fundamentally “changed” warfare. Then again, I am in the crowd that does not really believe in sudden paradigm shifts anyway.
