Why is this revolutionary mechanism STILL not in use?

>>33641024
Expensive and not necessary.
Especially when you consider full-auto is hardly ever used by riflemen.

>>33641036
That's why I wondered why they didn't implement this in LMGs

>>33641053
They are used deployed on bipods and are heavy already

>>33641036
Why don't they just implement it for fun?

>>33641024
Conventional rifles are lighter, less expensive, and still more accurate than 99% of their users. In full auto, conventional rifles are still more accurate than 99% of their users, recoil reduction in any way or no. Recoil reduction by way of suppression or muzzle braking gets the same result with the same results with less weight and expense.

There's literally no reason to throw in another piece of metal that could fuck up, add weight and expense, and provide no practical advantage.

>>33641065
Because this>>33641069
And military don't do shit for fun.
I know what military fun is like. It's mandatory and your bum hurts afterward.

>>33641024
Holly fuck I'm hard after watching that video

>>33641053
Have you never seen an Ultimax

>>33641024
Because AN-94 is better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJxpncKswEg

Because 5.45 is already effectively recoiless and nobody uses full auto anyway. This is just a gimmick that doesn't add practical functionality but adds further parts to fail.

>>33641671
>This is just a gimmick that doesn't add practical functionality but adds further parts to fail.
>This is what Americans unironically believe after 1986

>>33641024
>LMG
>long bursts

>>33641692
>Add a bunch of extra moving parts to the front of a rifle that even ten year olds can hold a bead with at 50 yards on full auto, just so you can slap "recoil reduction system!" on the brochure
>Not the definition of gimmick

>>33641692

This is what Eurocucks that have never shot a firearm let alone a full auto assault rifle believe.

It's not hard for us Americans to shoot full auto they can be rented in most states for cheap. Plus there are lots of current and ex military that would agree full auto is mostly unnecessary in an assault rifle.

File: IMG_0050.jpg (108KB, 1024x640px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1024x640px

>>33641749
>full auto is mostly unnecessary in an assault rifle
Semi autos aren't assault rifles, bubby

>>33641763
Your reading comprehension sucks.

>>33641692
Uh, no.

File: 1212678282205.jpg (29KB, 235x274px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 235x274px

>>33641608
>the average soldier doesn't understand recoil control.

What kind of North-African™ brand child soldiers is he thinking of? I was a conscript in fucking *Scandinavia*, and we still used full-auto to learn recoil control.

>>33641854
>What kind of North-African™ brand child soldiers is he thinking of?

he's thinking of parkourdude91 and other future marines who think the military is really cool but are too alpha to be yelled at in bootcamp

since his customers aren't military, he can say basically anything he wants about the military, especially if it makes his business sound more attractive to customers than free military training

>>33641749
>Plus there are lots of current and ex military that would agree full auto is mostly unnecessary in an assault rifle.
American ex military. Stock M16/M4 are terrible at full auto plus 1986 ban creates very negative perception for Americans.
>We failed to do it right so it should be fail for everobody

>>33641036
Pretty much this.

Yes it's a nice design that works well, but that doesn't mean it's worth the the cost and effort to field it everywhere.

>>33641892
>Stock M16/M4 are terrible at full auto
They're actually rather good compared to most of the competition but feel free to LARP away

>>33641892
Elaborate on your post. In what way is the M16 family terrible at full auto relative to other assault rifles, and how do others do it better?

>>33641927
>>33641945
>giving him the (you)s he so desperately craves

>>33641608
>>33641608

>Placing a pully inside the gun

Russians outkrauted the krauts with the AN94

>>33641892
>American ex military
being a former reservist NastyGirl does not give your retardation any legitimacy

>>33641793
Your writing is trash.

>>33641036
Exactly, but you probably COULD use full auto with that, inside 100m instead of inside 25m(or whatever your effective full auto range is).

>>33641692
I guess Russians don't feel that way and that's why an94 is the main service rifle, right?

>>33641024
You're right, the original ak was so impossible to shoot that no country or nigger tribe ever used them because they're so bad.

>>33641945
>In what way is the M16 family terrible at full auto relative to other assault rifles
Relative to AK-74? 80% more recoil (muzzle brake says hi) and 30% more ROF. BTW even AK-74 recoil impulse is too much. Soviet "Abakan" program that ended by AN-94 called for 10 times (!) reduction of automatic fire dispersion from standing position comparing to AK-74.

>>33643772
>Relative to AK-74? 80% more recoil
Holy shit you're actually retarded

"it's not worth the cost to implement" is only part of the answer. The other part is that a properly engineered muzzle brake, or a suppressor can make the gun just as controllable, and muzzle brakes are way cheaper.

>>33641024
Is Vickers a Russian agent? How does he keep getting his hands on all this stuff?

File: Larry-Vickers-Shot-Show-Ruger-Drama.jpg (91KB, 549x781px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 549x781px

>>33641854
It's Larry Snickers, he thinks he's the smartest and most important person in the world and that everyone else knows nothing. It's pretty standard for him.

>>33643772
I can't tell if you're fishing for (you)s or if you're just unironically stupid.

File: 12321.jpg (83KB, 556x699px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 556x699px

>>33644668
>burgers BTFO by science

>>33645465
>Measuring recoil by raw joules of rearward force and not angular momentum
>When comparing an AK with an AR (a weapon with an in-line recoil design)
Throw it in the trash, and yourself with it.

Because full auto guns are illegal so that smaller companies cannot start off with a workable prototype to sell to the military and big companies don't give a shit about anything they sell to the military.

>>33645465
>what is mechanical operation of weapon, furniture, and direction of force
You're a fucking idiot, one of the greatest things about the AR is the in-line recoil system it employs, something your faggy little chart (the fuck is "AR15" supposed to be?) doesn't begin to take into account.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a425518.pdf

>>33641024
That's actually really impressive.

>>33641608
AN-94 is neat, but more complicated and prone to misfires.

>>33645699
>and prone to misfires.
It passed soviet small arms trials (btw AR-15 in any from didn't).

>>33641749
Actually, there should be more Euros than Americans that have shot a full auto assault rifle. There are still a lot of countries with conscription, even more so until a decade ago.

>>33641024

Just for the hell of it, what if this system was in use for .50 cals, 14.5mm and 20mm, like trying to make them as lighter machine guns, sniper rifles, hell even 'assault' rifles. Oh, I just remembered the XM109. What can you guys think of?

>>33645773
>full auto assault rifle
>full auto
>assault rifle
Tautology.

>>33645808
I was using the same term than the anon I was responding to, but thanks for the correction mr. autismo.

ITT: Noguns don't understand the benefit of sight picture moving around less on semiauto fire