The Fn2000 ejects its shells forward, not downward, incidentally, im modelling an FN2000 for INF, coming soon{tm}
Unofficial technical weapon question forum.
- Thread starter Scythe
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Does anyone have an information on the first edition CZ-75? I've heard alot of things about this gun and was interested in actually reading something about it.
What do you want to know? I have an early eighties variant in the collection. Nice gun, one of the few high cap 9X19's that one can carry in condition one safely.
Apparently after the 1980s, the quality control on the CZ series of pistols went downhill considerably, according to a few CZ owners who own weapons from both the 1980s and mid 1990s, but I'd like to confirm that with someone who preferably has experience with older and newer CZs.
I would'nt say the quality per se went down, rather they changed the styling to "compete" with the other high cap nines out there. Adding a serrated trigger guard front,high visibility sights, etc.. I will say the base finish has gotten better. Some of the true first gen CZ 75's were damn ugly, posessing a baked paint over a matte blue finish. Looked like some of the Brit surplus GP 1935's that occasionally turned up here.
Anyhow, I sure would'nt trade mine for a "modern" one, purely from a looks standpoint. I like the simple, clean lines of the early '75's, and I managed to get one with the high polish blue (although after nearly 20 years of use, it's worn a bit thin in places.)
Functionally? The newer ones LOOK like the internal components have less hand fitting (for what this is worth. One should not make the disassembly of the '75's action a regular habit) and I'm told that there is minor fitting required to properly install newer components in an older '75, but this is hardly unusual in my experience with handguns.
Anyhow, I sure would'nt trade mine for a "modern" one, purely from a looks standpoint. I like the simple, clean lines of the early '75's, and I managed to get one with the high polish blue (although after nearly 20 years of use, it's worn a bit thin in places.)
Functionally? The newer ones LOOK like the internal components have less hand fitting (for what this is worth. One should not make the disassembly of the '75's action a regular habit) and I'm told that there is minor fitting required to properly install newer components in an older '75, but this is hardly unusual in my experience with handguns.
From what I've heard, the first CZ-75 was made from harder metal than the standard for pistols at the time, although, I'm not sure what advantages this would have over the standard. And when they (the Czech government) decided to sell the CZ-75 to in the West, they lowered the steel grade (added: for production costs, speed, and to lengthen machine part life) and extended the slide rails (maybe to compensate for accuracy?), and from what I've heard it made it less of a great pistol.
I've also heard that the grip of the pistol was narrowed toward the front, making it very comfortable. (I assume this didn't change in the second edition.)
Please remember that all this is what I've read around on the internet on various places over the past few months.
I've also heard that the grip of the pistol was narrowed toward the front, making it very comfortable. (I assume this didn't change in the second edition.)
Please remember that all this is what I've read around on the internet on various places over the past few months.
Last edited:
Huh. I admit, I have'nt stuffed a recent (nor any) CZ-75 under a Vickers, or Brinell tester to confirm this rumor, but it'd suprise me. Ceska Zbrovjka has rarely made crap. Czech firearms have always (to me) seemed to be superbly made, and engineered. Even the WORST CZ I ever owned was very safe, and reliable. (CZ-50 in .32 ACP. A real poodle shooter.)
CZ has been "managed" by the Czech government, but they are still and were pretty much a commercial concern. They were one of the few Com-Bloc counties that sold commercially through the Soviet era.(Yugoslavia and to a lesser extent Albania were the others.)
Either way, if you MUST have a first gen '75, they turn up occasionally, for decent money.
CZ has been "managed" by the Czech government, but they are still and were pretty much a commercial concern. They were one of the few Com-Bloc counties that sold commercially through the Soviet era.(Yugoslavia and to a lesser extent Albania were the others.)
Either way, if you MUST have a first gen '75, they turn up occasionally, for decent money.
Indeed, I've heard that a first edition CZ-75 in good shape could come up to around $4,000.
However, if the things I've been hearing are true, it may be worth it...maybe.
However, if the things I've been hearing are true, it may be worth it...maybe.
Four LARGE? No way. You could buy more than a few SiG P-210's for that. And if y u must have ONE 9X19MM pistol, THAT is it.
Caseless ammo, why hasn't any military adopted it? Reduced wight, no brass ejection, supposed higher ROF capability due to ejection process being eliminated... where does it go wrong?
the weapons are expensive to maintain, and unreliable, they also require an electrical charge to ignite some of them, which as we all know, batteries dont last forever.
The USARMY has been looking into a form of caseless ammunition for a stationary weapons platform, its called the ADS {Area Denial System}, its basically a box with 36 preloaded barrels, with a highest rate of fire of 1 million rounds per minute {yes, you read that correctly}, it is supposed to be able to be vehicle mounted as well, aside from being remote and stationary. These have virtually no moving parts and has to have each barrel reloaded manually after firing, its in prototype stage.
The USARMY has been looking into a form of caseless ammunition for a stationary weapons platform, its called the ADS {Area Denial System}, its basically a box with 36 preloaded barrels, with a highest rate of fire of 1 million rounds per minute {yes, you read that correctly}, it is supposed to be able to be vehicle mounted as well, aside from being remote and stationary. These have virtually no moving parts and has to have each barrel reloaded manually after firing, its in prototype stage.
geogob
Koohii o nomimasu ka?
Bushwack said:
I see something like the ADS more efficient for missile counter mesures (a little like the CIWS on ships) or for fixe or automated 3rd or 4th generation anti-vehicular mines.
Interesting post Bush! I didn't know such thing was being worked on.
Ah thanks, yea I heard something about resin build up in the chamber since there is no case to contain the explosion or something of that sort. However, you wouldn't necesarilly need an electric firing mechanism, afaik the g11 didn't use electric ignition. I also remember reading somewhere about a system which did use electric ignition of which the battery would last for ~5000 rounds, which seems to me more than a single soldier would fire during an engagement.
Ok, I have another question. This one's about single action revolvers, specifically the original Peacemaker.
I stole a Guns and Ammo magazine from my uncle's mail (they also have an article on the .50 cal 1911, sounds like it might be a good gun, I mean heck, it IS the 1911) and I happened acrossed an article about revolvers...I think, but what's caught my eye in it is this quote under a picture some Colt Peacemaker look-a-likes, "Arguably making the best replica of them all, Unites States Firearms produces these Rodeos to keep the SASS shooters happy."
My question is, are these the guys who make the best Peacemaker replica? Are they based on the original three screw design? I did about 30 seconds of research on the SASS site, and came to the conclusion that the guys are cowboy lovers, and are into the weapons and clothes of the time, so I figured they'd want a three screw Colt SAA. But the site of the manufacturer doesn't mention anything about this.
Undoubtedly there are three screws on the sides of these pistols in the magazine and on the site, but I just wanted to be sure.
So this post boils down to:
1. Does USFirearms make the best Colt SAA replica? And...
2. Are they based on the original three screw design?
I stole a Guns and Ammo magazine from my uncle's mail (they also have an article on the .50 cal 1911, sounds like it might be a good gun, I mean heck, it IS the 1911) and I happened acrossed an article about revolvers...I think, but what's caught my eye in it is this quote under a picture some Colt Peacemaker look-a-likes, "Arguably making the best replica of them all, Unites States Firearms produces these Rodeos to keep the SASS shooters happy."
My question is, are these the guys who make the best Peacemaker replica? Are they based on the original three screw design? I did about 30 seconds of research on the SASS site, and came to the conclusion that the guys are cowboy lovers, and are into the weapons and clothes of the time, so I figured they'd want a three screw Colt SAA. But the site of the manufacturer doesn't mention anything about this.
Undoubtedly there are three screws on the sides of these pistols in the magazine and on the site, but I just wanted to be sure.
So this post boils down to:
1. Does USFirearms make the best Colt SAA replica? And...
2. Are they based on the original three screw design?
I'm looking for information about the ballistics (range, where the power starts to drop off, ect) on the 5.56 / M16 and the 7.69 round. I just started messing around with moding with the BF:V engine and found that it seems to support a pretty advanced damage / projectile system that's really not being used. So as a pet project i wanted to try and get a proper bullet drop and loss of power over range into my mod.
I was hoping that someone could point me in the direction of helpfull info. Also when reading the technical details what exactly is "maximum effective range & Max range" how is it determined, ect. Is it the range at which the bullet's drag has caused it to slow to a certain extent or is it more of a statment of where the " hitting power " has been reduced to a certain point? It's kinda confusing.
I've also noticed that the muzzle velocity's for the 7.62 rounds are generally lower than those of the 5.56 rounds (proper Muz.velocity is about all i got working at the moment) So i know that there's more to it, cause as it stands the 5.56 actually works better for sniping because it's traveling faster. It must be effected by drag more or have a "rounder" firing arc, than that of the 7.62?
I was hoping that someone could point me in the direction of helpfull info. Also when reading the technical details what exactly is "maximum effective range & Max range" how is it determined, ect. Is it the range at which the bullet's drag has caused it to slow to a certain extent or is it more of a statment of where the " hitting power " has been reduced to a certain point? It's kinda confusing.
I've also noticed that the muzzle velocity's for the 7.62 rounds are generally lower than those of the 5.56 rounds (proper Muz.velocity is about all i got working at the moment) So i know that there's more to it, cause as it stands the 5.56 actually works better for sniping because it's traveling faster. It must be effected by drag more or have a "rounder" firing arc, than that of the 7.62?
I made this compilation of charts to compare caseless to the others. The one in the bottom(grey) is caseless and is in a different measurement unit but you probably won't need that. Also its missing 7.62x51 is it?
AFAIK 5.56 is affected more by drag because of its reduced projectile weight. But don't take my word for it :/.
AFAIK 5.56 is affected more by drag because of its reduced projectile weight. But don't take my word for it :/.
Attachments
geogob said:
It's been posted to this forum in the past, but here's the test fire video of the prototype: http://www.metalstorm.com/videos/ms_36barrel_mpg.zip
For more yummy extras check out the video section there at http://www.metalstorm.com
Hmm. The only "1914" Colt I know of were the Norwegian liscence made Koneigsberg guns. The .45 ACP has a "metric assload" of names, the 11.25X23mm, the 11.45X23mm, 11.47X23mm, .450 Auto(British.)..They're all basically.45 ACP, either way .
In addition, there would be the Colt revolvers chambered for the .455 Webley. (AKA 11.25X19mm, or 11.43x19mm) Many were made before and during 1914 for Canada, and England..
So, which were you referring to?
In addition, there would be the Colt revolvers chambered for the .455 Webley. (AKA 11.25X19mm, or 11.43x19mm) Many were made before and during 1914 for Canada, and England..
So, which were you referring to?