Odd things you find appealing thread

fpbp

File: 1486908966216.jpg (11KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 240x240px

>>34051578
>>34051583
>>34051584
>>34051594

Honestly making the AR lower out of plastic is somewhat dumb id say, i mean it would be totally ok if the AR stock would be connected to the upper receiver and not to the lower (i truly wonder who's the mouthbreather responsible for that) but as it stand's i can't really accept the polymer lower.

>>34052196
If the stock were directly connected to the upper, disassembly would suddenly become all sorts of fucked.

>>34052206
Ofc it wouldn't be the same old swing open, but it wouldn't really have to be too complicated.

File: 1411415564808.jpg (330KB, 3051x2161px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 3051x2161px

>>34051567
If YOU like it, then fuck everyone else. It's your gun not /k/'s.

That being said, I personally am not a fan of them. But that maybe because I am old enough to remember seeing them back in the BAN-era. Alot of younger shooters who didn't live through the ban like thumbhole stocks too..

idk, who can understand kids these days.

I find AR-10 derivatives appealing
>7.62 real fuckin NATO
>20" barrels
>AR aesthetics but better

File: 047691f44fbadff36826c31ddd37f682.jpg (129KB, 800x358px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 800x358px

>>34053440

>>34055029
HNNNNGH

>>34055029
>>34055676
God I wish that were me

File: Zulu_1.jpg (79KB, 601x256px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 601x256px

Single shots with falling blocks and top breaks.

>tfw not a 19th century British NCO

File: c939fd5e-dcb6-4f98-8b95-96a0605c2ff5.jpg (671KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

671KB, 960x1280px

>>34051567

File: 500px-CalicoM105S.jpg (17KB, 500x109px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 500x109px

>>34051567
Wood stocked Calicos are pure sex to me but whenever one pops up for sale I don't have the funds. I like to imagine I would be a Martian frontiersman

Also I already have a 10/22 and can't really justify a .22 that doesn't work reliably.

>>34052196
Polymer isn't bad..The scar lower receiver is polymer too, it can be done right if you reinforce it correctly.

>>34056091
With the scar the stock isn't attached to the lower but it is attached on rails to the upper, that was exactly my point, polymer lower can most certainly be done but i wouldn't want it done with the AR.

>>34055680
>>34055676
>7.62x51mm NATO firepower in a package weighing under 8 pounds, reportedly capable of 1 MOA accuracy with service ammo

Why wasn't this goddamn thing adopted more widely damnit.

>>34056206
>real fucking NATO in full auto
>weighing under 8 pounds
There you go.

>>34051567
A thumbhole stock would make it stronger methinks.

>>34052509
Please anon, regale us with your firearm design expertise.

>>34056206
>why didn't countries adopt a battle rifle.
I don't know anon, why do you chew window sills?

>>34056215
Dude literally no battle rifle is capable of accurate full auto fire.

The AR-10 has recoil that is quite inline with the stock so while it will push you back it will not throw the muzzle up into the skies. The recoil isn't nearly as violent as with some other battle rifles either like the G3 for example.

>>34056258
Well if i were to design it i would probably go with a HK style stock attachment.

With the HK style stock attachment you could have the stock very rigidly attached to the upper receiver so the strength of the lower wouldn't be as important. Also, rather than the SCAR style stock that slides off downwards the HK style stock slides backwards so you could easily use the classic AR-15 recoil spring/buffer setup.

>>34056287
Dude what are you talking about the AR-10 was designed in the fifties, battle rifles were all the rage back then, haven't you heard of the FAL, G3, M14, Stgw 57, and so on?

>>34051567
Romanian PSL, That Yugo SVD Bastardization that shor 8MM, a VEPR MOLOT SVD.

>>34056023
That's fucking beautiful. What is it?

>>34056586
Nevermind I found it. it's a Hyde-Inland M2 trials SMG.

File: f67bd1269c143b1517e9c27750bf7be3.jpg (199KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 640x480px

This thing is sexy as fuck. Not sure how popular that opinion is.