Switching away from the Springfield was a mistake. 5.56 just

File: images (49).jpg (40KB, 475x310px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 475x310px

>>34061438
North Korea agrees with you.

>>34061450
Nugget is a shitty bolt action. There's a reason all modern bolts are based on the Mauser: fixed bolt head.

>>34061438
I know this is bait, but...
Springfield? Did you just skip over the M1 and M14? (That said, the M1 is outdated and finnicky and the M14 is just outright shit, regardless of the cartridge it's chambered in.)

>>34061462
M1 and M14 had stopping power, but they were both heavy and bulky. There are better rifles to choose from today.

File: potato.jpg (62KB, 600x663px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 600x663px

>>34061438
Damn, you should be a general.

>>34061459
Majority of bolts are based on Mauser because Mauser sold their shit everywhere. Enfield was state armoury, French only got contractors making their rifles when it was necessary etc. If you started producing rifle with MAS36 bolt on large scale, you'd outprice every mauser-like competitor while having 99% of the performance.
>>34061530
M14 was shit all around. If they really wanted .308 battle rifle they've had FAL, G3 or AR10 to choose from, all of them hundred times better than the disaster M14 was.

>>34061570
>M14 was shit all around
I agree.
>>34061570
>Majority of bolts are based on Mauser because Mauser sold their shit everywhere. Enfield was state armoury, French only got contractors making their rifles when it was necessary etc. If you started producing rifle with MAS36 bolt on large scale, you'd outprice every mauser-like competitor while having 99% of the performance.
You can't deny that the Mauser action was more durable, reliable, and accurate than either the Enfield or nugget.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMvvTIKZsZ4

>>34061593
Cool rifle, but how reliable is it?

>>34061577
>You can't deny that the Mauser action was more durable, reliable, and accurate than either the Enfield or nugget.
Nugget is generally shit competitor here because it's only not remembered like Carcano is because it was used by at least borderline competent army.

Enfield isn't as durable or accurate but the difference is still not very huge. The mauser-enfield debate is super old and I'm not getting into it outside of one mention. The debate reminds AK-AR15 debate because the non-subjective arguments are basically arguing whether .303 or any of the thousands of calibres mauser was chambered in is better(same with 7.62x39 vs 5.56) while the mechanical differences usually aren't really understood beyond "Mauser can survive 10% more rounds going through it before something breaks".

The thing is - had Enfield made SMLE's for the export market outside of British dominions and you would see its bolt design coming up in every second bolt-action hunting rifle(the other half would be mausers) as it's more of a familiarity thing than actual performance. Had somebody used MAS36 bolt design and it would outcompete them both with lower price.

>>34061438
Low effort b8? At this hour?

>>34061610
no idea, but 60 rounds is a good start

>>34061621
Even ignoring the fact that the Enfield's bolt head fucks up headspace and has to be readjusted all the time, it's a cock on close action, which increases lock time.

>>34061621
>more of a familiarity thing than actual performance
For militaries, sure, but the civilian market demands perfection, at least for rifles above a certain price point.