Jump to content

to add your 300x250 banner, pay ad zone 5
Airsoft Atlanta is your source for quality airsoft guns and rifle parts
to add your Text Link here, pay ad zone 3

AirsoftAtlanta.com AirsoftNMore.com Airsplat.com AirsoftRC.com
Vote for us to add your 180x30 banner here, pay ad zone 2

If you appreciate this website, please ASF Donation or Check Out the ASF Store. If you can not help us financially,
then at least help us by telling a friend: Share us on your favorite social networking website Bookmark and Share

Whiteout

Member
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A

Everything posted by Whiteout

  1. No, you would not find mention of "Jungle Boots", you would find mention of "tactical boots" and "desert boots"...which are exactly the same boots, in different color. Same materials for sole, same patterns for sole, same weave sides (materials are no longer raw canvas, as the original jungle boots were, but it's still a heavy-duty breathable fabric weave), and same sole and ankle re-enforcement. I HAVE a pair (and they're good boots for spring/summer/early fall hiking and climbing). I purchased them because my old jungles finally blew a seam. Know where I got hold of them? I have a cousin on the Chicago PD who purchased them from uniform supply on her PD discount. Believe me, I stay current on issue equipment. Hard not to, when you have family who uses it on a day to day basis, in various areas...a CPD cop, an SAR/Fire pilot in Montana (ex USAF cousin, mentioned elsewhere), two current close relatives (son of a cousin and cousin) in the Navy and Marines, a recently ETSd son of a cousin from the US Army, and a brother-in-law who retired as a Lt Col less than 5 years ago, with his butter bar years, and both CO stints in combat arms (and a tour in the dusty and in the rocky since 2003, as well as having been a butter bar with an armored cav unit in Storm). I might be 17 years discharged, at this point in my life, but I regularly talk to family still in, or more recently separated, than myself. Nor are they my only contact in the services (hard NOT to be friends with at least a few servicemen when you live on the edge of the Puget Sound. 3 naval bases, a combined air force/army base, and a NAWS base all within 90 minutes of me. The nearest naval base less than 15 minutes from me, actually) or various local police forces (you get first name basis with a fair number when you're heavily into local live steel culture, archery culture, and hunting. I happen to practice pistol at the same range the local SP barracks, the town I'm in, plus three closest "local forces", and the county sheriffs use for practice and qualification.) As many cops have a military background, if you still doubt me, go find yourself a senior officer, someone nearing retirement, who will have done their military time around the same time I did...and ask him. You'll get the same thing I've been trying to tell you.
  2. I was speaking to winter gear about layering. But loose clothing isn't the heatstroke hazard you paint it to be (haven't even had heat exhaustion using such methods, even being in the field all day in Texas brush country summer. Hydrate. Which you want to do in ANY weather.) As for snagging issues, depends on terrain and material used. I have very little issue with snaggage, even going through blackberry thickets, wearing loose outers made of ripstop nylon or working trade "canvas". Best source for ripstop nylon clothing? Army/Navy surplus or summerweight work coveralls. You are entirely wrong about "high speed guys in modern combat gear" abandoning combat style boots. They go to reinforced canvas side boots of the type that was called "jungle boots" in the Vietnam era, and is now referred to as "tactical weave" or "desert issue". If you're playing in muck in the colder weather, as the OP was asking about, you want waterproof, so you go away from weaves. Summer, they will probably do the job. But a decent ankle reinforcement is still preferable. As for the "looking pretty in formation" note...100% wrong. In formations which appearance is at all considered, uniform is low-quarter shoes and your greens. In BDU formation, standards aren't "pretty" at all, as it is acceptable in such formations to show up with an uncreased, unstarched uniform with no wrinkles actually ironed into it, and a pair of boots without obvious streaks in the wax. And that's exactly how most soldier show up for BDU formations...those are our "working duds", not our "show-off clothes".
  3. Family tradition, eh? My family has a tradition of service, but there aren't many of us who went "hardcore" in the last few generations. Me with the 75th, my father in law, who extended 3 times after his first tour in Vietnam, doing all the extensions as Recon, and a grandad who did the Pacific Theater in subs. The rest of them...well, I can't really blame one cousin. She's a she, and couldn't get into combat arms, so was a crewman for F-15s. She and I are the only ones from our generation. Have another cousin, who wasn't even born when I went in, who's USMC right now...on "make pretty" duty at the embassy in Poland, and a second cousin who just made PO1 in communications. My own father (the shame of it) joined the USAF to avoid being drafted into the Army or USMC, and used as a self-propelled sandbag, and his dad, though having participated at Normandy, spent his time as an engineer--not a combat engineer, even (I have respect for those guys.."can do" isn't an on-paper motto for them, neither is the unofficial "first we dig 'em, then we die in 'em"). Simunition--is it the same wax-and-paint that used to be the stuff under that name, or have they made it any better? Ruined barrels pretty fast, but it sure gave everyone an interest in avoiding getting hit, rather than having so many guys who wanted to goldbrick let someone tag them in the laser gear, so they could sit back, and do whatever (face it, you won't find a grunt, ANYWHERE, who won't find a way to goldbrick at every opportunity, if what's being done isn't something he actively enjoys) Syria/Jordan kind of makes sense (but bodes poorly for our political situation), but why would we be strengthening forces in Kuwait? Unless it's going to be used as a stepping stone for Syria or Iran? Keep your head down, out there, bud. Most Americans like to laugh it off, but Iran and Syria are the only militaries in that area that are actually reasonably competent.
  4. Two ways to go on boots...find someplace that sells the OLD Army style combat boots (the "speed lace" type), and wax and polish the bejeezus out of them. As long as I didn't step in water deeper than my boot-top, my feet stayed dry through 4 years of wearing those, in georgia clay, central american jungle, and a not-so-dry desert, plus various FTX environments. They're fairly inexpensive, but get them from a reputable surplus dealer. They'll run between $30 and $99 a pair, depending on source, and whether they are old surplus, or new boots simply made in the same way. The old surplus are usually cheaper, because the shop bought job lot crates at government auction, in unmarked crates, and got boots...but since that means the leather is older, oil it, let the oil soak in, a few times, THEN wax/polish. And put a new coat of polishign wax on them after every cleaning (just a buff shine works well...smear black shoe polish, which is wax, on the boot, snap a cloth diaper across the surface a few times, and you're done) Second option is go for brand. Think hard on getting plain old hunting boots. I use Irish Setter's Ridgehawk. About $150 a pair, gore-tex lined, waterproof, good track, breathe well enough for summer, spring, and early fall wear, warm enough to spend half a night traipsing through snow to get to a late fall or winter season tree stand. And they come in Mossy Oak pattern standard But Irish Setter is one of about a dozen brands of high quality gore-tex lined hunting boots that provide the ankle support, foot protection, traction, and so on that makes them desirable. Little edit* If you go with Setters, you have to break them in WELL, the soles are thick, and they stay rather stiff for a while. Army boots break in in about two days of full-day wear.
  5. LOL! Old goats all sound the same, on one side, or another. Either we're grumpy old curmudgeons who just don't want to be told what to do, or they're folks who went throughout life so sheltered that they could afford to think that telling other people how they HAVE to do things, and why they CAN'T do things is the "right" way to be. Personally, I prefer the grouches. They make better neighbors.
  6. Not just USMC, that's standard Army infantry, as well, for both mech and leg active units (don't know about airborne, was run through the school, and off to RIP, who don't use the same team layout). But yes, I agree, if you have the manpower, get an actual SAW replica going, otherwise the self-winding sound activating drum on M4/M-16 platforms (never seen a big self-winder for AK in action) is an intimidator, and very effective.
  7. Possibly. Probably, even. Like I said, an experiment purely out of curiosity (you forgot an important factor, though. Titanium is "self lubricating" to an extent) that I don't have huge hopes for. I'll still have the original G&P set to replace them with :)
  8. Did I miss that detail? LOL. Too right. Cotton against the skin is disaster in cold or wet weather. Wool, or one of the wicking/breathable artificial fabrics, such as the one Underarmor is made of. And wet wool gets heavier than my mother-in-law. So unless you're Scottish or Welsh and have a thing for sheep, the Underarmor as the layer closest to the skin is most comfortable and effective.
  9. Would be if it stopped on the surface, like dropping it into thick mud. Dropping it into deeper water will cause the splash to magnify under the surface. .45 does that (better than a 9), but the math's still the same...magnify that "splash" in bodily fluids (and blood is a big victim. A huge portion of the less viscous liquid in the body is blood, so it carries such impact further and faster, where the sudden jump in pressure doesn't just burst the vessels) If this wasn't true, the .45 wouldn't have such a shot/kill ratio in practical use, nor would its knockdown power be so praised. But you earlier agreed that these were things a .45 possessed in greater proportions than a 9mm. So now we're just arguing on the "why"...lol.
  10. Agreed, expensive as all get out. So is paintball, hunting, archery, shooting for "the fun of it" on a regular basis. But it still stands that you don't need to make it more expensive. Put the money in the stuff that's vital (guns, functional accessories, upgrades, high end ammo), and make the rest founded on a strong high end base. I'll "for instance" here. I bow hunt and rifle hunt. On 4 way tags every year (deer, elk, bear, cougar), plus spring bear and cougar, plus turkey. On the face of it, I would need sets of hunting camo for fall evergreen forest of two wights, clearcut logging land, winter evergreen of heavier weight, winter high desert grassland, and spring evergreen and high desert. For good commercial hunting camo you'll spend around $500 minimum for each setup (more expensive than gaming camo because you can't use any cotton-based blends, nor most fabrics other than wool for anything other than your outer shell. They all reflect "white" in the IR range, while the dyes don't reflect at all). On top of that, I have a bow that was $1,100 stock, about $300 worth of gear on it, $150 worth of arrows, $40 in hunting heads, plus the gear I need for an animal no matter what weapon I take it with (skinning and capeing knives, suspension rigs for bleeding, all of that), running about $200. Plus the gear purchased for camping that is used in a deer camp. So early season bow cost me $1,590 before buying camo that doesn't really match my surroundings, and not counting the stuff that's "shared" with other situations. Add a normal commercial camo base for early fall season, that's over $2,000, at least. High end camo setups might cost up to a thousand. Add something suitable for late season (small white patterns over predominately brown or black), even if it's light-weight shell, there's another $250 if you go just with a commercial overshell. Winter weight on this side of the mountains would be another $500+, if I didn't just make my own shell, and high desert and spring evergreen outfits would be another $500 each. Instead, I have a top quality bow, top quality arrows, top quality arrowheads, do my own fletching (mounting of vanes (feathers)), which ensures higher quality and quality control, and ONE set of very high end camouflage that's waterproof, windproof, and has a good base pattern to allow for a thinner home done shell to work. And that outfit serves all seasons, all areas, with customized to specific location/season patterns, meaning that, as camo, it works better. Now if you are playing for a living, or, even more likely, have sponsors *throwing* this stuff at you, in order to make better sales, spending this kind of money makes sense. If you're going to use this stuff for a dozen different things, for each outfit, spending like this makes sense. If you're doing it for one specific activity that is a part time hobby, it doesn't. The money you DON'T spend on this stuff is money you CAN spend on better guns, more guns, upgrades, time on commercial fields. All of the equipment that really makes a serious difference.
  11. And in the end, that is truly the key, isn't it? Knowing how and when people will move, knowing what draws they eye, and confuses it. You have those down, you're 3/4 to being a "live field" soldier. Which makes the difference between "Ma Bell" (anyone remember those commercials? "reach out, reach out and touch someone!") and "a bunch of friends and I get together and laugh ourselves silly while throwing plastic at each-other, not really caring about "win" and "lose"" Call it a competitive streak, but I don't buy into the "everyone who plays is a winner" mindset. If you go out to do something competitive, the idea is to cut the other guy's heart out, not to work up a sweat to no great purpose. Which is part of why I like playing with my boys, and their friends. They have the physical advantages of being young, relatively fit, and energetic to a fault. I have the advantages of knowing strategy and breaking morale by constantly using those strategies.
  12. Yup...and a bigger "splash" in the body cavities is the most effective way to do it...crushed, disrupted, or torn organs, and torn veins/arteries caused by that "splash". Plus, you're more likely to not only damage the heart directly (among other organs), but to also create the same sort of physical shock an electric defibrillator can. While ripping the major blood carriers around it. Isn't as damaging to lungs, of course. But most organs are "soft", and will spread the damage, as well as taking more, themselves. Again, look up kinetic energy statistics...if it was purely "bleeding them out", a .380 would be every bit as effective as a 9mm, the rounds are almost identical, outside of the weight and length of the bullet itself. Close to identical width, penetration, close range through and through statistics (anything further than 15 feet away, the 9 is far more likely to punch all the way through, but as you get closer, they come closer to matching). The 9 creates a much heavier "splash" as it goes through...heavy enough to make people consider a 9 and a .45 as about equal in pros and cons, and usually agree that the .40 is a great compromise between the two.
  13. Agreed, just thought the waiting period law was federal. Wrong. He was tackled after a civilian with a CCW shot him. Read the articles again. Also, I can't find the post now, but someone claimed pistol rounds of a heavier caliber penetrate better than a lighter caliber. Not at all true, look up some table comparisons from G&A or half a dozen other publications. A .45 is superior in STOPPING POWER, not penetration. That is to say it transfers more kinetic energy to the body it hits. because it is heavier, it is going slower (often slow enough it doesn't exit, so it transferred ALL of its energy to the body). A 9mm, which is smaller than 5 other "common handgun calibers", has the best penetration rating of any pistol round. A .380, a little "lady's purse gun", usually, has more penetration at normal pistol ranges than the .38, despite being shorter, having less powder charge. And its bullet is the same diameter (shorter though, and I mean bullet, not cartridge). This is because an automatic delivers better seal than a revolver, so the round is going quite a bit faster, short range, and has quite a bit more ability to penetrate, as a result, even if the compared weights means the wheelg7un round has more total kinetic energy. That just means the .38 is more likely to go all the way through than the .380 is. But what's MOST important in pistol calibers is a phenomenon called "hydrostatic shock". Go to the nearest lake, or even a deep puddle. Take three rocks of similar weight and size, but each slightly smaller and lighter than the last (small difference is what's wanted). Drop the biggest and heaviest round in the puddle, and judge the size of the splash, and how far the more pronounced rings spread. Now take the medium one, and toss it a few feet in the air, to land in he water, and watch the same things. Now pitch the smallest on straight down into the water fairly hard, and see what it does. This is "hydrostatic shock", the body is high in water content, so when the bullets hit, they cause the same sort of "splashing" in cavities and organs. The round with the strongest and biggest splash is the one you want at close range. Because it's the one that will "splash" inside the human body, disrupting fluids, sometimes shattering organs, often tearing major veins and arteries. The round with the greatest hydrostatic shock is the one least dependent on you hitting a vital organ directly, and the least dependent on hitting an organ smaller than your fist to get an almost-instant kill.
  14. True enough, I suppose, but not prosecuted as a primary charge, and not in cases of non-statutory consensual sex. Which means the law is already de facto not being enforced. Not hardly. I just have a rabid sense of liberty and responsibility. Freedom comes with responsibility, and both should be hand in hand, legally. But individual responsibility should be limited to immediate damages such as hurting someone or destroying their property in a way immediately detectable, and having law re-enforce the responsibility of exercise of freedom. In other words, I as a person shouldn't be liable if you get lung cancer, even if you can absolutely prove it was the smoking of myself and other individuals that caused it (ABSOLUTE proof), however a legal entity (like a corporation) should be held responsible for long term damages caused by its products, since it wouldn't exist at all without the production of those products, AND the allowance of such entity to be formed is based in part on its accrued responsibility unprotected by Constitutional law, only by statutory or admiralty law (to clarify that...if I'm born, I enjoy all the rights and freedoms applying to any person in the united states. For a company to exist, it has to be licensed, so does not enjoy those same rights, and must shoulder greater forms of responsibility). To give an example of one of my more unpopular stances: If a girl gets pregnant, and keeps the baby, against the will of her partner, he is responsible for part of the associated medical bills, and for partial support of the baby for 18 years. If he wants to keep it, and she doesn't, he has no recourse. Inequality. If she doesn't want it, but he does, and you're going to be equal, she should be required (if health issues aren't involved) to have the kid, relinquish parental rights and responsibilities, and never have any further requirements. 9 months of completely invasive time is a fair trade in equality for 19 years of responsibility in the form of time spent to earn support payments. One or the other. If he can be held responsible that way, so should she. If she can't, neither should he.
  15. There isn't a handgun wait? Thought that was a fed law, these days. I only know there is one in WA, AZ, and UT, from experience (Arizona is surprisingly tough on actual gun laws, despite loose laws on carry).
  16. I guess in those cases, it is more "knowing your target's behavior" than anything else, once the ability to hit your target properly is established.
  17. You're right, not a great analogy, but still my point...it boils down to why you buy camo not ideal for your environment at great expense, when you can make the perfect stuff for much less. The later "dump a ton of appropriate-for-professionals, useless for amateurs into your Jeep" was closer to apt.
  18. Frog, if by "legit dudes" you mean professional players, or people using them for simulations for training in their real life jobs (military and similar), the high dollars spent for season-sepcific, environment-specific hear is a cost of the applications needed to do your job right. If it's a game to you, spending that kind of money for your "outfit" makes zero sense. It's like taking a Jeep Renegade and dropping the Ford 5.0 (doable without a single bolt change), high torque gears, and a lift with matching wheels, when the thing's never going to go off a paved road, compared with doing the same thing because you are a pro competitor in bogging or vehicular rock climbing, where your ability to make a living relies on high dollar high specialization equipment. And maybe sweats were a bad example, you're right, in a lot of environments, they will be shredded quickly (and they are usually cotton or cotton blend...bad outdoor fabric). But the overall point of less expensive, home done and tailored shells stands...if money isn't riding on it, but effectiveness for play, spending hundreds of dollars for each season's gear, and having a full set for every season and every environment you play in makes no sense. As for "why don't you see "legit dudes" doing it...you do, in their own way... custom camo patterns, soft shell outers, custom paint on weapons and gear, "temporary" modifications to customize to the field (local debris stuck to the gear, or tucked into this or that anchoring strap of grommet). If they play a desert or dusty area, you see them "dusting down" their gear, to make it blend better, if they're on a forest field, you see them tucking bits of greenery and/or twigs in their gear, here and there, and "pre-griming" their gear to make it blend more naturally. For a "just playing" player, making something that allows you to wear ONE base set of gear, but allows you to use that gear in multiple environments, with more effect than a pro (who knows what the principals of good application and use of camo, already) is simply an effective tool to gain an advantage.
  19. Liked the example just fine, was just trying to demonstrate you were far underselling the importance and capabilities of good equipment mated with well trained shooters. Which is why I mostly spoke of the *shooters*.
  20. Pretty simple technique, actually. Same one I was taught while in. Walk bursts until I knew where I was hitting, and switch target for target anywhere I had seen anything moving that might need suppressing, watching the whole area I could see. Job was to keep the other guys' heads down while ours moved, and if I didn't do it that way, someone on my side would catch one in the back from me, or the guy in the perfect position to pop up and throw lead at him would get to feeling brave while I spent all my time on one target that only endangered the guys in his direct line. It's fine to rip a 2 or 3 second burst if you're going after someone you saw moving, until you see he's back under cover, but otherwise your whole job is to try to know where every enemy is that's in your line of sight, and keep them from getting a shot on your teammates while they are in motion. Sniper's job is to pick off anyone who stands too long, or lurks too long waiting for the shot on a mobile man, MG's is to make sure everybody keeps their heads down, and pretty much stays in the same place, mobile guys are there to move around to the side and deliver crossfire, or to get into the target and "kick doors and break things". Simple enough. And it's a LOT scarier for your targets if it seems more like you have complete control and confidence than if you just spray like a fire hose. Think about it...if you were on the receiving end, would you be more likely to chance a peek-around shot, whether out of frustration, or increased confidence, when a machine gunner is simply spraying all around in your general direction, or if he's throwing a few rounds that hit your cover, then doing the same to one of your teammate's position's cover, and then the next one, with no established pattern? That MG is showing not only can he hit your cover in controlled bursts, but he has the confidence in his ability to throw bursts at multiple positions, is watching all of those positions, AND you don't know when the next burst is coming for your cover positions...and are pretty sure, since he's watching, that if he sees movement in your direction, you're going to get ventilated by a longer burst. This general principal is why our troops are doing better in the sandbox than the muj...every one of them has no technique, they just spray and pray. Usually from the hip, while screaming, with their eyes shut. They only win a battle when they have overwhelming numbers and a GREAT ambush position, or when they use an IED, which isn't an actual engagement. Our folks are trained in controlled fire, aimed fire, and controlled bursts. And always have a higher kill ratio than the goat-copulators, even in those "can't win" situations.
  21. Gotcha. Live exercise training. I wish we'd had these toys while I was in...when I started, we were 'experimenting" with the wax-and-dye rounds that fouled a barrel something awful, and caused jams half the time, then we went to the blank suppressor/lIR emitter "laser tag" type system that never aimed right, screeched in your ear when you'd been hit, until the exercise was over, and the trainer used the key on your harness, and made the weapon almost impossible to clean, without spending 8 hours on it. Plus jammed every other round. No burst fire, you went semi-only if you had a brain in your head, and got so frustrated that you just yanked the T-bar and ejected any jammed blank without worrying whether it was a misfire or not. You guys aren't doing "wraps" in the 'Stans, though? Seen a lot of footage where it looked like guys had done so, and my nephew definitely used one for his (he's Uncle Sam's Misguided Children, just back from his 5th deployment between Iraq and the 'Stan). Good luck, and God bless, man. Thanks for your service, and be careful. Don't forget the goats are off-limits, apparently guys were going blind from using the hand, and started mistaking locals for goats (the beards are similar, I can sort of understand it) Didn't know the Army had that many volunteers from Kentucky RLtW
  22. Possible, possible. Was going off live steel and paintball experience there (though with paintball, graphite lube is best, and doesn't leave any film). But I wasn't speaking about cleaning the barrel (which should, indeed, be done with a dry cloth, just as with a real gun...in the real thing, solvent, then brush, then solvent again, then cloth until it's coming out dry and clean), but about prepping just before play, and not leaving it "slick", just running a cleaning cloth slightly damped with lube through the barrel a few times, to "prime the metal", as match shooters call it. Since you should clean it after every use, anyhow, this should be harmless in the way of debris collection, and reduce friction in the bore, providing a slightly tighter seal, and an even one. But that's "in theory" as far as airsoft goes. And yes, no round, from any type of gun, completely fills the barrel. You'd blow the breech up with backpressure, if it did. That doesn't mean you don't want to create the maximum amount of "non-wasted" pressure that doesn't overproduce or underproduce. So you're better off seeing what kind of additions in pressure you can get before modifying to something that does it by producing greater volume (and also has more mass, which impacts everything else, in tiny ways that can be detrimental to the overall effect and durability, if it isn't actually the right solution to the problem).
  23. Think I've seen that same formula. Even if I hadn't, it's something anyone familiar with the idea of ballistic curve should get. I have to lay my money with you on the "never seen one last long" idea. Though with more and more methods used to increase durability of gears, there's only so much that can be done to avoid extreme stress on the axles and friction/resistance against the gear teeth. Any upgrade to FPS is going to increase the stress on those, no matter what. I'm doing my best to talk a buddy into doing some after-hours work in his company's machine shop, and turning out some all titanium gears for me, in hopes that they will demonstrate consistent function, and if they do, seeing how far I can take an FPS upgrade before I break something, but I don't think it's going to be budget-friendly, even if it works as well as I hope, so marketing such a thing wouldn't be worthwhile, just an experiment. One that I don't have any really high hopes for, just something to appease curiosity. And no, the gun will NOT be used, as upgraded, for field play. Even if it doesn't work for long, it'd be too dangerous while it worked.
  24. Not at all true. The reason for a LMG, MG, or HMG is volume of fire, and speed at which you can rip those bursts off. With a LMG you can pop those 3-5 round bursts with full control better than every second to second and a half from a suppressing position, where someone carrying a rifleman's gun is both more likely to be relatively limited on ammunition, AND needed to be highly mobile. Your job is to ALLOW them that mobility, and keep the enemy's head down, without hitting them...if you're ripping huge bursts, you're not walking to target or switching targets as quickly as you can...so either you'll traverse, and hit your own teammate, or fail to suppress the right enemy at the right time, because you're focused on where those huge long bursts are going, instead of "big picturing" the field. As for the "10 foot spread" claim...doesn't do you a BIT of good if someone who knows how to handle a support weapon like an M4 knows how to aim, and quickly, and locates your general position by sound while you're pounding away in that spray...he can pop up over his cover, or around a corner, snap two or three shots at you, and be down, with a better than even chance of not being hit by your spray before he ducks back, or you're hit. I'm not 10 foot wide, and wouldn't expose myself any more than I had to...probably a target of under 3 feet square...while you're throwing a 10 foot diameter cone at me (31 square feet and change). If you've been throwing bursts, not only will you see where every enemy is that tries to move, thinking your attention is elsewhere, but you'll know where to line up on me to hit that 3sq feet, rather than hoping that 10:1 odds work in your favor through volume of fire. Matt...buying quality is ALWAYS worthwhile...but "quality" doesn't always mean "top dollar". Look up reviews written by techs, professional players, organizations that use them in scenario training (for sniping guns, SWAT teams and FBI use them for small caliber sniper training in "live exercise" scenario training, don't know if any other organizations do). Anyone in their right mind will tell you the $2000 Systema is "the perfect trainer", but there is absolutely nothing wrong with second or third best--or even fifth, if it has the qualities you want, and is as good, or almost as good, in the opinion of the "professionals" using them (tech reviews are best for telling you about reliability and ease of upgrade, not accuracy and effectiveness. But they tend to come hand in hand, don't they?) Always make certain, though, if you're going to play big field (only place a sniper makes sense, anyway) that not only do you start with a good weapon, and tune it more and more (starting with creating a better seal in cylinder and piston head), but when you upgrade, STAY that demanding on quality. If you're going to try your hand at sniping, you have to be picky as hell with everything about it. You have to baby it, and "give it love". Anything less, and you've got a substandard weapon, and too little investment (not money investment, care type investment) to make you welded to it. This all applies to "support" rifles, as well, but requires a bit less dedication and attention to "perfection" in tuning. Don't jump on the bandwagon with me, just because of what I'm saying here, but I just dumped my JG off on my boys, to buy the G&P "new style" M4/CAR 15, all metal except stock and hand guards. Might not be to your taste, but the reviews I found said the KWA and ICS closest to the same model were about equal in quality, with the KWA having a minor issue with front handguard solidity...and all were under $300, stock. The KWA had the advantage of the GX2 gearbox, which has a better quality reputation, so far as I was able to find in reviews, but that rattle concerned me as "stable platform" considerations count more than what one all steel gearbox and gears, re-enforced, compared to another, of equal reported quality (stock), to me. Specifically search all the store pages, find what looks like it might interest you, then look up reviews and comparisons done by the folks making a living or doing hardcore real-life training with them, for comparisons. When you see overwhelming reviews in favor of one that interests you, in your price range, compared to the others in the same range, with the same qualities, you've found your gun :) I know this all sounds too "hooahh hooahh" as brett seems to think, but anything you can do to take it to the levels of proper milsim will improve your performance...that's why they call it milsim (military simulation) The CM is a good weapon! Not prime, but very good. I'm currently in love with my newest Winchester .300mag, because I got one of the limited edition "varmint barrel" models (the thicker barrel body, same bore, and a tighter rifling), and put the composite stock on it, but even it isn't my "dream" weapon (and it's MUCH too much for deer and antelope, though I am praying to get a sheep draw (mountain goat) in the next couple years, and it's perfect for bear...or cougar if I see one in season). If I get my way about it, someday I'm going to talk my wife into a Robar .50, and a Mannlicher 7.62/.308...at several grand a piece, plus good optics for them (which means another couple grand), though I might go for the Manny Pro African in .450 as a compromise, and spend the "saved money" on a trip to Africa or New Zealand (I would dearly love to go after a cape buff...the only vegetarian in the world that seems to take great joy in backtracking, and hunting its hunters, so it can pound them into greasy spots in the dirt). It's too much gun for anything other than ridgeline hunting or BIG game, and the wrong caliber to even play at competition shooting at long ranges, but :drool: If you like handguns...ever shot the CZ75 or ALFA out of Czechoslovakia? Communist paranoia and Western ideas on quality control sure make for a superior weapon ;) My wife carries a 75 as her concealed piece, has NEVER had a jam on it, in several thousand range rounds, never any untoward rattle, and it's gone a couple hundred rounds before getting properly cleaned, once, and still shot like a showroom piece. If I weren't a dedicated Colt pistol man, I'd be carrying one.
  25. No, a bore kit for the circumstances is your last-ditch try. An upbore does have more in it to push with the piston...but the piston, piston heads, and chambers are usually ported (vented), so will lose as much pressure as before...the barrel has only so much volume, and the BB only travels as fast as the volume of air being pumped into it increases...a vented piston/chamber setup will just "blow it out the sides", usually... Unless you have already installed a silicone or rubber seal on your piston head, and lubed it properly (chamber, piston, and gasket), which have a lot to do with sealing the barrel and chamber, ensuring steady increase in pressure. Going to a metal piston head sometimes helps, too, since that creates a situation in which the head has "less give". A increase in bore is only effective if you do all of that and STILL aren't getting the pressure you need, because at that point, you have done everything you can to stop "waste" of pressure, soo something applying more volume of air will actually get it into the barrel to push the BB. Also a tight bore barrel, or lubing the barrel is often helpful, and using high quality/high precision BBs is ALWAYS a help.
×
×
  • Create New...