What does /k/ think of making older guns more suitable for modern

File: 1466368638284.png (1016KB, 640x900px) Image search: [Google]

1016KB, 640x900px

>>30522236
>STGW 57
>Tacticooled
A pox on whomever did this, may their children and their children and their childrens children suffer for this affront

>>30522259
It looks awesome.

I can't understand people like you.

You actually look at that gun and say "oh wow it's so awful that someone made it BETTER".

>>30522236
The design paradigms and in fact the designs themselves are usually very impractical compared to their successors and when you start changing things to make them "more suitable" you have a Ship of Thesus situation.

Also, "converting" older weapons is destroying history and people who do it should be fucking castrated.

Are you talking about Bubba'ing guns?

I don't really care what people do with their guns. As long as the NRA museum or any gun museum for that matter has an original that I can look at then I'll be happy

>>30522342
It's not better than the original in any way...

All new firearm designs borrow heavily from already established ones. This is a dumb question.

File: MAS_4956ModifiedEoTech.jpg (51KB, 680x257px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 680x257px

Why not, the US army did it with the M14.

France did it as well with the MAS49/56, albeit in very limited numbers for special forces.

>same accuracy as the SR25, for one third of the price

>>30522342
Depends on how much you like 'tacticool' shit I suppose

Many people think it's gone too far and would use the rifle in the OP as an example.

File: 1467348516345.png (353KB, 459x360px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 459x360px

>>30522441
DELETE THIS

File: 1466640953858.jpg (39KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x500px

>>30522342
>Sticking Plastic crap on a classic rifle
>Better