tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post739857400172071566..comments2023-11-10T04:17:00.492-05:00Comments on View From The Porch: Five rifles meme...Tamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07285540310465422476noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-75947228845471402952009-11-03T20:08:40.084-05:002009-11-03T20:08:40.084-05:00the 6.8 spc is a dud it is good for nothing it is...the 6.8 spc is a dud it is good for nothing it is no better than 5.56 nato it just costs more to shoot projectile selection is a joke 7.62x39 is way better o yeah special forces uses 6.8 can u confirm that basicaly 6.8spc has nothing over good ole 6' wound chanel creating within 300yds and over 2700fps 5.56nato cartridge notice how theres not to many people actualy suvive being shot by 5.56 and are still alive to tell about itbloody warthoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04456452109379710501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-42424205304536664552009-10-19T13:19:54.938-04:002009-10-19T13:19:54.938-04:00Ed, thanks for the info, and I look forward to any...Ed, thanks for the info, and I look forward to anything you find on Marshall.<br /><br />The ammo development stuff is fascinating (there's so much I don't know). It reminds me that the original Brit bullpup design had something quite close to that .277, if memory serves...<br /><br />When you speak of the ergonomics of the M-16 vice the M-14 for close/closer fights, would something like the Shorty/SOCOM M1A variants alleviate some of that, or is more an issue of the stock and grip?Noah Dnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-90242351130422198882009-10-17T15:45:51.487-04:002009-10-17T15:45:51.487-04:00Robinson XCR? Kinda' mousey and tinny. Underwh...Robinson XCR? Kinda' mousey and tinny. Underwhelming actually. Get a Stag Arms, Rock River, or Bushmaster.<br /><br /> They're all made predominently of parts from the same factory (Continental Machine and Tool Co., I work there), and I would have a slight preference for the STAG only because it has an E.R.Shaw barrel.<br /><br /> The other rifles have good tubes also, but I've had a bit more luck with the Shaws. They make Remington's centerfire barrels, and anyone who can cut a tube for the 40x target rifle can cut my 6.8or 5.56 any day.Ed fosternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-88643413743390810942009-10-17T14:48:25.829-04:002009-10-17T14:48:25.829-04:00"From memory, the author pretty much deconstr..."<i>From memory, the author pretty much deconstructed most of the good general's missive, including, I believe, a number of deliberate misquotes and falsified "eye witnesses".</i>"<br /><br />IIRC, Hackworth didn't have much good to say about S.L.A. Marshall either after working with him post-Korea.Tamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07285540310465422476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-26291680243921964702009-10-17T14:43:18.953-04:002009-10-17T14:43:18.953-04:00OK gang, since there are FAR more well educated gu...OK gang, since there are FAR more well educated gunnies here than I pretend to be, does anyone have opinions about the Robinson Arms XCR? I ask because I am throwing quarters in the jar, saving up to buy one.<br /><br />All comments--pro or con--gladly accepted.<br /><br />Apologies to Tam, I hope this is not considered hijacking the thread--no offense intended. <br /><br />cap'n chumbucketAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-84012957722507242402009-10-17T14:35:23.789-04:002009-10-17T14:35:23.789-04:00Noah D., I'll have to dig around, the article ...Noah D., I'll have to dig around, the article was a good 20 years ago, but I imagine it's still online somewhere.<br /><br /> From memory, the author pretty much deconstructed most of the good general's missive, including, I believe, a number of deliberate misquotes and falsified "eye witnesses". It was in one of the professional military journals, and I promise I'll work on it.<br /><br /> As for the capabilities of the M-16/6.8mm vs. the M14/7.62, I mentioned using the M-14 in the kind of conditions Bobby Cromer faced as a counter sniper in Afganistan.<br /><br /> Evidently, the large number of helicopters available has pushed a lot of the badguys up above the altitude where choppers are useful, and people like Bobby (son of my shooting buddy Bob Cromer Sr.) have to tump in from landing sites miles away and several thousand feet lower.<br /><br /> I was shipping lots of M-16 parts from Continental down to the Remington guys in Englishtown Kentucky, back when they took the 6.8 program over from the Army Marksmanship Unit, and they were kind enough to keep me in the loop.<br /><br /> The .30 Remington case was the biggest that would feed reliably through the M-16 magazine, and the .422 diameter head of the .30Rem left a decent amount of metal in the bolt face surround. The .451diameter of the Kalashnikov rim was/is pretty marginal in that respect.<br /><br /> I do't want to tick off any .458 SOCOM users out there, but I really would feel more comfortable with the extra steel in that area.<br /><br /> As a quick aside, they also developed the cartridge in 6mm, 6.5mm., 7mm, and 7.62 mm variants. The 6mm was too light, the 7mm and 7.62mm hit a bit harder up close, but lost hit probability farther out, and the 6.5 (a la Grendel) was a bit flatter but not as hard hitting. They settled on the 6.8/.277 diameter as the best tactical compromise.<br /><br /> The Remington plant is surrounded by beanfields, and the Remington guys were knocking bucks over consistently at 500 yards, admittedly at known yardage. I suspect that was due as much to bullet design as kinetic energy, but still... <br /><br /> And I really shouldn't talk about what Remington is doing to their 115 grain bullet to improve lethality, as I might end up working until I'm 95 to repay the fines, but it's really cool. <br /><br /> Still, the 6.8SPC is, at best, a 600/700 yard round, even for harrassing fire. The M-14, with M118 match ammo(the 173 grain boattail), doesn't go subsonic and destabilize until around 1,200 yards, so for anything short of .338 Lapua ranges it's a really great marksman's rifle.<br /><br /> But for bayonet to 500 meter tactical stuff and alleyways, I'd want the A4.<br /><br /> The only change I'd make to the weapon would be to cut a relief about 5/8th's of an inch wide and 3/4th's of an inch long under the sight, about .080 deep, so I could use the longer A-2 rear sight and get those extra 150 meters you lose on the M-4 carbine handle.<br /><br /> And I'm not dissing the M-14. From 300 yards to 1,000, it's still one of the best weapons in the world.<br /><br /> Filled with AP in an urban environment (I can get through a 20cm. cement wall with AP in 8 or 9 rounds), or having to shoot up 10 to 12 mm armor, it does things no lesser caliber rifle can.<br /><br /> I learned my trade on M-14 serial number TRW141270, and I still get a bit dewy-eyed when I hold one.<br /><br /> But for alleyways and door kicking, perhaps the M-16 has an edge in ergonomics.Ed Fosternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-72279466167199040362009-10-17T07:56:33.649-04:002009-10-17T07:56:33.649-04:00"2. Trapdoor Springfield: Early and widely us..."<i>2. Trapdoor Springfield: Early and widely used metallic cartridge.</i>"<br /><br />I love my floptop, but by the time it was adopted in 1873, the Jerries had been using the 11mm Mauser Gewehr 71 for two years. It was also used by China, Honduras, Japan, Siam, and Uruguay, not to mention Boer and Irish guerillas. I'm not sure if the Trapdoor was ever used outside the US.<br /><br />I think the most significant American rifle of that kind was probably the Remington Rolling Block.Tamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07285540310465422476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-16066144791001084092009-10-17T07:41:14.814-04:002009-10-17T07:41:14.814-04:00"Which were the first rifles to fling spitzer..."<i>Which were the first rifles to fling spitzer jacketed bullets? A mauser of some sort?</i>"<br /><br />The French replaced round-nosed Balle M with spitzer-type Balle D in 1900. The Boche followed suit in 1905, the Yanks in '06, and the Limeys in '10.Tamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07285540310465422476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-82831947237497764622009-10-17T07:07:00.378-04:002009-10-17T07:07:00.378-04:00Bram: "Jim, I would gladly have traded my M16...Bram: "Jim, I would gladly have traded my M16A2 for a Springfield in '91. At least I would have been confident my rifle would go "bang" five times."<br /><br />I was an editor in Hartford in the very early 70s when Colt began producing the M16 in quantity, and the tales coming off the factory floor about manufacturing shortcuts, half-ass ad hoc fixes, and general corporate buggery were frightening, especially to a guy who had friends still in Viet Nam. <br /><br />I was about quarter, maybe a third, serious in the crack about using Springfields in the desert. Open country, long ranges, no important expectation of banzai attacks. Not to mention the relative ease of maintenance in a world of sand and dust. <br /><br />But I wasn't there, so there are a million voices more qualified than mine to advise the Joint Chiefs.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00034752526895428019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-61583705083437409002009-10-17T05:37:05.082-04:002009-10-17T05:37:05.082-04:00Which were the first rifles to fling spitzer jacke...Which were the first rifles to fling spitzer jacketed bullets? A mauser of some sort?<br /><br />That was a pretty important development. If the 300 meter avg max engagement figure is to be believed (and I do eagerly await Ed telling us all why it is not), then jacketed spitzer bullets were not too important to infantry rifles. I know for darn sure that they were important to machinegunning though. It would have been hard to keep no-mans land several hundred meters long, and to perform any sort of air to air gunnery without fairly aerodynamic bullets.Neutrino Cannonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11975378867727506317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-46613710277551366122009-10-17T04:42:12.634-04:002009-10-17T04:42:12.634-04:00Here was my list with a few notes. In historical ...Here was my list with a few notes. In historical order, the five most significant rifles.<br /><br />1. Kentucky Long Rifle: Produced at the village-shop level a people's rifle featuring accuracy and establishing it as an American Tradition.<br /><br />2. Trapdoor Springfield: Early and widely used metallic cartridge.<br /><br />3. 98 Mauser: Bolt-action benchmark.<br /><br />4. Garand: Established semi-autos as battle rifle standard.<br /><br />5. M16: 40-year old revolution still continuing.Robert Langhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16497658569363397644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-9303980464152262982009-10-16T23:59:38.051-04:002009-10-16T23:59:38.051-04:00Okay, Ed, I have to ask a few questions.
Forget t...Okay, Ed, I have to ask a few questions.<br /><br /><i>Forget the B.S. 300 yard figure General Marshall (S.L.A., not George) wrote, it was as phoney as his comment about how many men supposedly fire their weapon in combat. He basically faked the entire report, and is still quoted as a reliable source.</i><br /><br />Got any sources on this? I'm <i>not</i> calling BS, mind - I want to know more.<br /><br /><i>If I were going into combat today and had my choice of weapons, it would be an M-16A4 in 6.8SPC for all around usefulness, or perhaps an M-14</i><br /><br />What would the first accomplish that the second couldn't?<br /><br />(I find it interesting that for how the US military trains its infantry, an M-14/M1A would be (approaching) ideal...)Noah Dnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-60978733968197056292009-10-16T23:19:08.448-04:002009-10-16T23:19:08.448-04:00I'm not forgetting the SMLE... it's a toug...I'm not forgetting the SMLE... it's a tough old fightin' rifle and it makes a good iron-sighted deer rifle. Mk7 ball... 174gr FMJ running +/-2440fps with a 200yd minimum sight setting. Swap the FMJ for a softpoint hunting bullet for deer. First bolt action rifle I ever had a clue about. I noticed the SMLE's and No.4's in the footage during the Mumbai attack.mustangernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-40993314127711501192009-10-16T22:22:23.683-04:002009-10-16T22:22:23.683-04:00Oh yes, everybody seems to have forgotten one of t...Oh yes, everybody seems to have forgotten one of the great military bolt actions in history, the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield, still being used in government service (carried by the Indian police as of the Mumbai attack) over 110 years after it was first introduced. It is seeing a resurgence with the Taliban in Afghanistan, mainly because it is significantly more accurate then the AK/AKM's and at longer ranges to boot.Michael in CTnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-20585875062965718572009-10-16T22:14:41.896-04:002009-10-16T22:14:41.896-04:00Something that needs to be kept in mind when compl...Something that needs to be kept in mind when complimenting or criticizing a gun is the timeframe and tactics being used when the gun was designed. The Garand was designed between the two World Wars (in the original .276 caliber) when the perceived lessons from the First World War was that long range, aimed fire from long service professionals, was important. The AK-47 and all of it various incarnations, was designed shortly after WWII, when the standard Russian tactic was the mass attack by poorly trained conscripts at short ranges. In simpler terms, don't blame the designer for building what the government wanted, even if what the government wanted was wrong. The AK-47 is the perfect design if you are a leader who thinks his people are expendable and won't be decently trained. What we want is a gun that is as easy to carry and shoot as an M-4 carbine, as a reliable as an AK-47, has a 1000 yard range and hits the target like a 12 gauge slug, only there isn't any such thing. I believe we have essentially reached the limits of conventional firearms, yes they can be tweaked and played around somewhat, but further changes will be incremental. Really, is the Glock that much different then a Browning Hi-Power?Michael in CTnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-90869477489476963772009-10-16T21:09:33.252-04:002009-10-16T21:09:33.252-04:00Part two:
As for historically significant firear...Part two:<br /><br /> As for historically significant firearms for bear, how about a .58 Remington Zouave with 505 gr. G.I. Minie ball, and a matching .58 Dragoon horse pistol, with or without the detachable buttstock?<br /><br /> And Hyp, I don't think a comparison of the M-1 Garand to the AK, either technically or historically, does justice to the American product.<br /><br /> The only serious war ever won by AK wielding troops was VietNam, and the entire North Vietnamese army ended up dead or in POW camps after the '72 offensive, beaten by South Vietnamese armed with M-16's and M-2 carbines.<br /><br /> The Communists "won" several years later because the Democrats cut appropriations to the South Vietnamese in half the year after, then in half again a few months later. Try fighting a war where you have to soldier 4 months to get paid for one, burn 4 gallons of diesel to get one, shoot 4 cartridges, etc.<br /><br /> If not a single AK had ever made it to Somalia, Ethiopia, Columbia, whatever, pick a rathole, the results would have been the same, just carried out with Lebels, Lee-Enfields, and Winchester 94's.<br /><br /> The combattants might actually have been more effective. I remember back during the Biafran war, the mercenaries running the show for the locals begged for bolt action and single shot weapons to equip their people, because with them the villagers aimed.<br /><br /> Hypothetical case. Imagine yourself as a leg infantryman, today, in rough, open country, with no immediate air or artillery on call.<br /><br /> Forget the B.S. 300 yard figure General Marshall (S.L.A., not George) wrote, it was as phoney as his comment about how many men supposedly fire their weapon in combat. He basically faked the entire report, and is still quoted as a reliable source. Go figure. <br /><br /> Now, back to the hypothesis. You can have either an AKM or a clean, sound M-1 Garand. Which will do a better job keeping you alive in the conditions stated?<br /><br /> The M-1, with which you control a circle a mile across, and, with AP ammo, can easily penetrate the wheelwell of a BTR, or the AKM, which puts you on equal footing with Mahboob the camel salesman?<br /><br /> Using the technology of the day, specifically the MacArthur mandated 30-06 cartridge used in commonality with the '03 rifle and Browning machinegun, what other weapon could have done as well?<br /><br /> With what other weapon could a squad of riflemen suppress fire from a sniper at 600 yards, the longest distance Germans were trained to fire?<br /><br /> I agree with Tam that the M-1 was a watershed weapon, but, given the technology of the day and the mindset of the American military, I also agree with Patton that it was the best shoulder fired weapon of the war.<br /><br /> And by mindset, I mean that American troops were taught to hit consistantly at 600 yards, an option that was always there when needed, and one that wasn't available for Germans armed with MP44's.<br /><br /> Other than not having the box mag Garand wanted to add from day one, I can't find a damn thing wrong with a weapon that, more than 70 years after it's introduction, is still, by European standards, a sniping weapon.<br /><br /> If I were going into combat today and had my choice of weapons, it would be an M-16A4 in 6.8SPC for all around usefulness, or perhaps an M-14 for the kind of mountaintop to mountain top work my friend Bob Cromer was doing until a few months ago in Afganistan.<br /><br /> But I wouldn't feel undergunned in the mountain scenario with an M-1. I've shot possibles with the weapon at 600 yards, prone with a sling, and I've bench rested a good but not spectacular example of the rifle at 1,000 yards and seen 18 of 20 shots go into a torso sized group.<br /><br /> How well would I have done in the Boer war armed with 70+ year old technology? Say a .69 smoothbore musket against 7mm Mausers at 1,200yards? Or my .58 Zouave against an MG-42 somewhere in France in 1944?<br /><br /> In that open country, I'd be a hell of a lot more worried if Mr. Badguy had a Garand than an AK, and for close quarters door-kicking against people who had just pumped a syringe of adrenaline, I want a 12 gauge with a bayonet.Ed Fosternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-42727253640940343772009-10-16T21:06:23.510-04:002009-10-16T21:06:23.510-04:00And Johnny Appleseed's cultural forebears won ...And Johnny Appleseed's cultural forebears won the battle of Saratoga as much as Tim Murphy and Benedict Arnold.<br /><br /> The first thing the Brits did whenever they took over a piece of territory in Wales, Ireland, Scotland, or western France, was to force the locals to cut down all trees, stone walls over 3 feet in height, and bocage type cattle fences within 2 pounder range of a major road.<br /><br /> It seems the standard tactic employed by the locals was to plannish the roadside trees whenever the road went through a forest. You drop a tree at an angle across the road, then drop one opposite it, and keep the herringbone pattern going for a mile or so.<br /><br /> The Brits couldn't pull the trees out of the way because their interwoven neighbors held them in place. They had to go to the end of the roadblock to disassemble it.<br /><br /> Which meant they would have to trickle through the forest on either side, without artillery, under constant ambush from well hidden snipers. <br /><br /> Burgoyne's soldiers were two weeks late to the battle, and most hadn't eaten in 3 or more days. Many hadn't had water for 24 hours.<br /><br /> The Brits were so desperate for food they sent virtually all their able light infantry over into Vermont to steal cattle.<br /><br /> Unfortunately for them, the American militia screen left them blind to Stark and Sullivan's troops waiting at Bennington.<br /><br />Imagine standing inside a black powder cloud for hours with an empty belly and nothing in your canteen to clear your throat.<br /><br /> For those who say a scratch militia has no use because it can't stand against regulars, I say "Piffle Sir". Or more, if there are no ladies around. <br /><br />It can delay, sabotage, cause loss of troops to the enemy as he is forced to defend his supply lines.<br /><br /> It can drive in his piquets and leave him floundering in the darkness without information of where the goodguys are.<br /><br /> End, part one (Man's on a roll).Ed Fosternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-86002976011332673952009-10-16T21:03:14.891-04:002009-10-16T21:03:14.891-04:00So.. the longrifle in the Revolutionary era was pr...So.. the longrifle in the Revolutionary era was pretty much like carrying a bolt-action hunting rifle to war now? Excellent in its niche, but try to outfit the whole army with them and you get spanked? <br /><br />(And I wanna know how Mr. B. takes the whole "Bar Fight of King's Mountain" thing. :) )Jennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16682072668997410668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-38431380906616137912009-10-16T20:47:21.340-04:002009-10-16T20:47:21.340-04:00The Battle of Kings Mountain... the mountain folks...The Battle of Kings Mountain... the mountain folks- mostly Scots and Irish- numbered 800 men armed with Pennsylvania/"Kentucky" or similar rifles. Those men were used to depending on their rifles for their families' meat. My understanding is they met the redcoats in the lower country instead of waiting till the redcoats reached their homes in the mountains between NE Georgia and what's now West Virginia. They won the battle in 30-45 minutes by decapitating the British officer corps with accurate aimed rifle fire. The enlisted Brits didn't know what to do without their chain of command.<br /><br />I noticed mention of the Ferguson rifle. Major Patrick Ferguson, who designed this weapon, was KIA in that battle. IIRC, the Brits had several thousand Ferguson rifles in storage in Boston, but never fielded them. Imagine what I mess that would've made of the American side. But, until the mid-1800's, it appears rifles just didn't fit the British idea of how to make war. They even turned down the Whitworth in the 1850's.mustangernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-18877770449170124522009-10-16T20:39:09.297-04:002009-10-16T20:39:09.297-04:00That's exactly my list, unless I do a Caleb ch...That's exactly my list, unless I do a Caleb cheat and pick a musket- and then I'd pick any of the first arquebi (ae? buses?) which were first large proportional issue to infantry.<br /><br />And there was no bar at King's mountain, it was bring your own barrel.staghoundshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05976667812875074135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-36492803588419123802009-10-16T18:34:20.094-04:002009-10-16T18:34:20.094-04:00jimbob86 - I agree with the merits of the Pennsy R...jimbob86 - I agree with the merits of the Pennsy Rifles, I'm enjoying the vibe of Johnny Appleseed (John Chapman). His strategic deployment of apple trees was an inspiration , and later someone made a stock for a Pennsylvania-pattern rifle from the wood of a tree found in an orchard that he had planted.<br /><br />By that definition, simplicity in pistols goes to the Liberator!NotClauswitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14358707844087117280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-80762509250287313472009-10-16T17:23:44.116-04:002009-10-16T17:23:44.116-04:00Luvs me some Military History....Luvs me some Military History....jimbob86noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-16455496248735596722009-10-16T17:04:37.506-04:002009-10-16T17:04:37.506-04:00See?
Now THIS is a guns'n'history discuss...See?<br /><br />Now THIS is a guns'n'history discussion!<br /><br />What historically significant rifle for bear? And what pistol in the same chambering?Tamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07285540310465422476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-89054096196200872162009-10-16T17:02:13.610-04:002009-10-16T17:02:13.610-04:00"Just because the Pennsylvania Rifle/Riflemen..."Just because the Pennsylvania Rifle/Riflemen were significant in one or two battles--they were occasionally tactically significant--does not mean that they were critical to the outcome of the war--a strategic influence."<br /><br />You mean to say that if Gentleman Johnny had smashed Gates at Saratoga and marched into Albany (what was to stop him?) that the Americans would have had a chance in hell of enduring yet another setback? Keep in mind that roughly 1/3 of the colonists were for the Revoloution, 1/3 nuetral, and 1/3 were Loyalists. That middle third went to whichever side looked like it would win. When Burgoyne failed so spectacularly, the Rebels got the backing of that middle 1/3 AND that of France.jimbob86noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15907727.post-536471785649565062009-10-16T16:51:43.214-04:002009-10-16T16:51:43.214-04:00Hypnagogue,
"You chose the Garand as one of ...Hypnagogue,<br /><br />"<i>You chose the Garand as one of the five most significant rifles because of the design contibution of a gas operated, rotating bolt, while ignoring the rest of it's flaws --</i>"<br /><br />Nope.<br /><br />I chose it because before the Garand, self-loading rifles were seen as too finicky, bulky, inaccurate, or unreliable for general issue to infantry.<br /><br />After the Garand, nobody issued manually-operated repeaters. It was the watershed; the game changer.<br /><br />As others have pointed out, the Mauser was a better rifle than the Lebel and the Chassepot was a better rifle than the Dreyse. The Bleriot wat a better plane than the Wright Flyer, too, but that's immaterial, even if wing-warping biplanes have been consigned to the "hangar of history", to use a phrase at random. :p<br /><br />Actually, you could have made a better argument against the Garand with one of its contemporaries: The FN-49. Except in broad conceptual outline, the Garand was a lungfish and died a quick death while the FN-49 evolved into the "Right Arm of the Free World". Only luck of the draw had the Garand fielded first.Tamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07285540310465422476noreply@blogger.com