Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 4698. page

>>28308738
Plastic Vanes are good for durability, and drag reduction on the arrow's fletching.

Traditional feather vanes vary wildly in terms of durability, and drag, but tend to weigh less.

Personally, I use plastic ones with every single arrow I own, but I practice often, and need to replace mine about every 6 months (shooting every single weekend)

When I head over to SCA events, I have special arrows I keep on me, to keep it historically correct, along with a traditional recurve (versus my usual takedown recurve).

I've noticed that the feathered arrows tend to stay aloft longer than the plastic counterparts (Mine are 36" with quail fletching, and simple bodkins type heads, whereas the plastic vanes are 34" carbon shaft, with both traditional broadheads, and target points)

>>28308821
That's similar to what I heard from someone that's into it. They said the feather ones can get messed up really easily. I've only used my (plastic vane) arrows for about 3 hours over the course of the month I've had them (it's been cold and I've been sick) and one already has a rip in it, but the arrow rest keeps dislodging so that should be the cause of that.

Feather feltching is more of a gimmick because they are more fragile, less "rifled" (they have less spin) and plastic ones are more sturdy.

>>28308676
.45 or youre not american

>>28308692
>muh knockdown powah

>>28308676
Penetration of softarmore

>>28308670
Remove slav

It's definitely the PKM

I've wanted one since I was a boy.

File: PKM 5.jpg (1MB, 2804x1869px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2804x1869px

>>28308670
Christmas spirit.

>>28294012

>>28308630
> buy used ESEE
> saw in half
> send in for warranty
> get new knife and jeff Randal talks shit about you on his forum

>>28308630
soak it in bleach just in case...

>>28308575
Call me when he gets his first AR.

It's basically my childhood.

File: 1436835633606.jpg (14KB, 500x309px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 500x309px

>>28308596

>>28308529
Apples and oranges, lad. And besides, why won't you just carry the 19-3?

>>28308544
I've been tempted to. The 4 inch barrel makes it a bit hard to carry in a waistband. Not to mention its a bit heavy(although I don't mind). I'm sure a good leather holster would help. I think I just want something a bit more portable.

>686
>Small
Yeah nah, L frames aren't too small. Go with a J frame if you want a carry gun or at most a 3" k frame.

Also
>.357 mag
>3 inch barrel
U wot m8? Have fun with harsh recoil and massive muzzle flash. Just stick to .38s or .38 +ps.

>>28308494
>much bigger wingspan so better mobility
>higher payload
>Better range
I think it has better air to air combat capabilities too. Don't quote me on that but I'd be surprised if the radar and avionics overall aren't better for air-to-air

The f-15 is a brilliant interceptor really.
Not knocking the f-16 but that's not what it's meant for these days.

The F-15 is basically better in every way compared to the F-16.
The F-15 is faster, can climb faster, carry more ordnance and missiles, supposedly more maneuverable and better range on a clean setup.
The major reason the USAF has more F-16 is that the F-16 is cheaper and more multirole.
The F-15 is an air superiority fighter made for flying fast and taking out Russian fighters in a dogfighting scenario.
The F-16 was made to be cheap like the A-4 skyhawk, to do everything and to be the signature export plane for the US.

>>28308494
Bigger payload, longer range, higher top speed, better avionics.

>>28308310
>mocking wannabe-Nazis with Rainbow Dash
Feels good man.

>>28308310

It was a AIRSOFT.

>>28308318
But that shit is vintage, it's like burning old siege equipment

>>28308305
Why would you sell it at a loss when you can get a full refund?

>>28308305

What's it like going through life as a mentally handicapped?

File: 1911082_702763386410504_251350353_o.jpg (125KB, 1600x1045px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1600x1045px

Because it's still a good weapon optic that's proven itself.

Autism wins.

>>28308184
soviet. nugget can shoot.

>>28308209
Samurai is strong and disciplined enough to take a bullet and keep fighting

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>28308075

>>28308075
cheap western made katana
just a wall hanger bro

>>28308075
>440 steel
>no manufacturing marks
They are mall ninja shit.

File: 1444788948132.jpg (108KB, 1341x1252px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1341x1252px

10 Hipoints.

>>28308050
>only ten

Buy Ammo

File: f-15.webm (1MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x720px

>>28307950

The question doesn't make sense because your descriptions aren't useful.

All they tell us are the diameter of the bullet and the length of the cartridge. This is not particularly useful as often shorter, more modern cartridges are considerably more powerful than older ones, or just shorter but fatter cartridges with higher internal capacities.

Also, you can name a cartridge whatever the hell you want. .223, 5.56, .22-250, .220 swift, .219 Zipper, 5.7x28, .225 wichester, are all just cartridges that use a bullet with a nominal diameter of 0.224. There is no rule that a cartridge has to be exactly what the name says it is.

That said, if you are writing fiction, just think that the rounds we are at were arrived at by somewhat logical conclusions. The graduations don't have to be the same- there's no reason the .30-30s of your fantasy world can't be, say, .31-95, which actually better describes the 30-30 than the name 30-30 does (a 0.308 diameter bullet in a cartridge introduced in 1895).

If I wanted a reliable gimmick to really approximate real world cartridges with different names, I would give them a name based on their diameters and then subtended by their case capacities- nobody does that in real life, but it is a somewhat useful metric that tells how powerful a cartridge can be.

For instance, a 30-06 holds roughly 68 grains of water and uses a 0.308 bullet. Why not call your equivalent cartridge the 31-68? That would add an interesting realistic element and comparison.

>>28308091

These are good points, thank you.

And I would assume that they would have the same quality of powder as the tech level of the guns is around that of the present time.

best fictional cartridge would be an irrational number like pi mm

Dont put ur face to close to the back of the gun when firing, the recoil will almost break ur nose. Also make sure to clean it or you can have a slam fire. Besides that the gun is extremely reliable and also incredibly accurate for only $200-300. Id recommend getting a different stock and adding a scope eventually for only like $150. Theres really not much history about the gun so modding its not gonna really ruin it.

Pretty much the everyman's semiauto rifle. It's cheap to feed and easy to use and maintain. Buy Chinese if you can as the yugo barrels are not chromed and will suffer if you use corrosive ammunition. Irons should be fine as x39 drops like a rock within 200m anyway. Good luck with your purchase.

>>28307820

What's there to learn?

Good cheap simple rifle. Buy and shoot.