|
Post by demonnachos on May 7, 2016 21:04:32 GMT
I've seen bigger
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 7, 2016 21:37:15 GMT
Or playing jacks like a man. Of course, but they're usually operated by a crew;
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 7, 2016 21:53:05 GMT
Wasn't there an even bigger one in Canada that they used to use to shoot stuff into space?
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 7, 2016 21:55:54 GMT
I don't know if it was in Canada, but the guy who designed it was Canadian. He ended up getting shot by the Mossad for trying to build one for Saddam Hussain.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 8, 2016 5:49:07 GMT
Gerald Bull.
Apparently he was a bit of a mad scientist type like you might find in a Bond film. As long as he was getting paid for his supergun project he'd work for just about anybody.
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on May 8, 2016 19:08:12 GMT
I told that rascal he should be more choosy with his contracts, I skip all things from the Middle-East because they always want to shoot you if you don't meet their silly expectations (you can't build a perfect doomsday cannon in a cave in two weeks with nothing but scrap metal and goats, you need at least 6 maybe 6.5 weeks).
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 8, 2016 19:39:07 GMT
Got a chance to shoot at 400yds today, only thing I fired was the Kar98. That's pretty damned good. Out of 10 rounds I only got two fliers (one skimmed the right side of the neck, the other is in the top right of the photo, to the left of that little box), and 5 of the 8 that landed in the black were centred vertically, but strung out horizontally. I'm pleased with that considering I was using iron sights to hit this;
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on May 8, 2016 21:07:02 GMT
Holy shit!
That's fucking amazing?!
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 8, 2016 21:31:29 GMT
Yep. Every one of those 8 shots would be a kill. I'd love to see what I could do with optics on this rifle.
I'd also like to see what I could do with a WW1 era Mauser in good condition, the barrel and sight radius were both 5" longer on those.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on May 8, 2016 21:36:23 GMT
Maybe it also comes down to you being a good shot. But optics would no doubt make that even more on point.
Keep in mind, the effective range of an AK47 is allegedly 400m.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 9, 2016 0:13:01 GMT
I'm a good shot, but putting optics on it would make it easier to aim it at the same point on the target consistently, that being said, the markings on the iron sights on this rifle are correct out to at least 400yds, unlike a number of my other rifles I can set this one to 100, 200, 300, and 400 and it'll hit dead centre for elevation at those distances. I'm sure I can tighten my grouping significantly with a little practice, and setting up the shooting position a bit better than it is.
If that, I think it's probably a bit shorter. The Mauser has a clear advantage as it fires a significantly heavier bullet (I think it's like 75gr heavier than what the AK was meant to use) with a much larger powder charge, and it's a bolt-action, and (at least pre-war and early war rifles) they were made to higher standards. I think both bullets actually travel around the same speed, but the extra weight of the 7.92x57mm means that it's less affected by crosswinds in flight, and it maintains a higher velocity farther out. I've read that the effective range of the Kar98K is about 550-600yds with a skilled marksman, and about 800yds with optics in the hands of a skilled marksman.
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on May 9, 2016 0:28:05 GMT
That makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 15, 2016 1:32:18 GMT
You have to shoot through that tiny hole from that far back to get to the target? Wouldn't that get in the way of your trajectory?
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 15, 2016 3:17:20 GMT
No, not really, it'd probably be an issue if I was firing something with a really steep ballistic arc, but something like that would be a nightmare to use at that range anyway. It helps that the range has a pretty significant downward slope, and the shooting position is about one story above the ground as well.
I bought a Henry H001 today, I saw it in a store and immediately liked it. It looks great, the action is smooth, and it's heavy as fuck (my Marlin 30-30 is maybe a little over a pound heavier).
I bought my mother a pink Daisy BB gun as a joke the other year, and it turns out this rifle is only about 1-1/2" longer, it doesn't come close to reaching the barrel rest in either of my safes.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 15, 2016 6:34:34 GMT
Maybe it's cuz I don't have anything for reference but it looks like you're shooting through a hole the size of a teacup. Which wouldn't give you much margin for error.
I'm also not sure if I like having zero field of view.
Talkin' levers and had to buy one. Did you get the carbine with the short barrel? You get a lever with a 16 inch barrel and there's not much that's gonna be shorter that isn't a bullpup. Even with an 18 inch it's a very compact rifle. If I bought a lever action .22 (which I plan to) it would be a Henry. Though I think I'd prefer the Golden Boy to the classic steel.
|
|