Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Right. And when other manufacturers built similar firearms, they didn't call them assault rifles. Our own military doesn't.
Semi Auto Bolt action Rifle ??
- Thread starter Acer-m14
- Start date
Not sure why this one didnt get brought up yet.
This crazy contraption
This crazy contraption
spat
.700 Nitro Express
They may not market them that way, but find me an example of a manufacturer claiming their select fire magazine fed, intermediate caliber rifle is not an assault rifle.
Just because someone's marketing department decides to come up with a new term, that doesn't invalidate the existing generic one.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I'm pretty sure that the M14 and 16 weren't designated and called assault rifles by the manufacturers that made them.
I'm pretty sure that the term was "service rifle."
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
Why would they?
It's just helpful, categorical nomenclature.
Is an Abrams a "tank"?
Is an MRAP a "tank"?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Does anyone know what a battle rifle is?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Yes. An Abrams is a tank.
No. An Mrap is a light tactical vehicle designed to withstand explosives.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
As I said before, the M14 is not strictly an assault rifle by virtue of the fact that it fires a "full power" cartridge.
Here is a page from DARPA calling the M16 an assault rifle. These are the people who put in the request for a select fire version of the AR15.
Project AGILE & the M16 Rifle
Not exactly what @Acer-m14 was looking for but while looking for other mechanically fun things found the Volcanic repeating pistol... "repeating pistol" lever action pistol. But unlike say an obrez which is a rifle chopped down to be discrete, this is actually a purpose built pistol .... predates lever action rifles.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Find me the page from Eugene Stoner himself. Let's see if he called it an assault rifle.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
It's like an assault rifle, except it fires a full power cartridge.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
So it no longer assaults. It battles. Got it.
What does a submachine gun do? A retreat gun perhaps?
spat
.700 Nitro Express
So, what do you think the difference is ?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
None at all.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Did you know that some Iraqi insurgents used SKS's? What were those? Sporting rifles?
spat
.700 Nitro Express
Find me one page where the manufacturer or designer of a select fire, intermediate caliber, magazine fed rifle claims it is not an assault rifle.
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Find me a page where someone finds a page.
soylentBlue
.357 mag
To the original post: Beretta Olympia semi-auto bolt action:
Vapor
.308 Win
There were also bizarre semi auto conversions of lee Enfields in the inter war period.
Edit: I see other people beat me to it. Always a day late and a dollar short.
Edit: I see other people beat me to it. Always a day late and a dollar short.
Hey as long as you showed up to the fun
Acer-m14
.950 JDJ
Another thread ruined. After having posted a link to video proof of the question in the OP I would have hoped a related discussion ensued. Instead we got a binary straw man argument over semantics.
Anyways, I found the Italian effort to be really interesting and a very clean and simple feat of engineering compared to some of the steampunkesque conversions of the Lee Enfields.
I wonder why recoil operation wasn't tried on more of these types of conversions?
We could also discuss the influence of bolt action ergonomics on the placement of controls on early to intermediate self loading designs. The placement of charging handles onnthe right side is often the result of the designer wishing to retain a similar manual of arms as the prior bolt action guns.
Anyways, I found the Italian effort to be really interesting and a very clean and simple feat of engineering compared to some of the steampunkesque conversions of the Lee Enfields.
I wonder why recoil operation wasn't tried on more of these types of conversions?
We could also discuss the influence of bolt action ergonomics on the placement of controls on early to intermediate self loading designs. The placement of charging handles onnthe right side is often the result of the designer wishing to retain a similar manual of arms as the prior bolt action guns.
@Podmonkey never actually thought how much the manual of arms most likely influenced charging handles to be on the right (wrong) side
But it makes sense, especially when you think how much militaries hate drastically different designs when it comes to retraining and many guns (look at the m14) are specifically designed to be similar to the guns they are meant to replace
But it makes sense, especially when you think how much militaries hate drastically different designs when it comes to retraining and many guns (look at the m14) are specifically designed to be similar to the guns they are meant to replace
Even as late as the AK, Kalashnikov specifically chose to have the charging handle on the right side to mimic the layout of the Mosin. Firing hand on grip at all times has been a recent doctrine. This seems logical but so did keep the charging handle on the same side as previous bolt guns.
This could actually be a really interesting topic since it could explore the transition from bolt action service rifles to self loading and then automatic.
What features on current semi automatic rifles are influenced by bolt actions?
Does anyone else wonder if Mauser style controlled round feed has ever been tried in a semi auto?
A other thing I find interesting is the shift away from action in stock style layouts to the everything attached to reciever layout, yet this latter style can also be seen in bolt action designs as far back as the Enfields and the MAS 36.
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
@Podmonkey your last point is interesting, I admit I had never really thought about it.
Not sure if you checked out the Forgotten Weapons video on the Mausers Gewehr 41(M) and the specific requirements Germany was looking for in a semiautomatic rifle during WW2 and Ian's explanation on how badly they wanted it to be pretty much exactly how a bolt action gun works but magically semi-auto (paraphrasing of course)
Yes, I saw that. Also the comparison of the G41M and W versions with the G43 on InRangeTV.
They have some other videos of other guns (cant recall which ones off the top of my head) that are transition guns or middle of a war gun that could have been much better but the old guard wanted to keep the same manual of arms as current service weapons.
The Madsen light machinegun is an automated Martini-Henry falling block action, and it worked very well. That is the most bizarre thing of all.
Also electrically driven gatling guns were in use back in the 19th century. On naval vessels.
Also electrically driven gatling guns were in use back in the 19th century. On naval vessels.