Thread 64382413

was this really THAT bad? People born decades after it was in service talk about it like it went off in it's holster on it's own and blew up in people's hands. It COULDNT have been that bad right?

Best raifu

>>64382413 (OP)
it was a 1930s design trying to compete in the 50s/60s. if it came out 10-15 years earlier it would have been great.

>>64382413 (OP)
>was this really THAT bad?
on paper it was fine, an M1 garand that took 20-round box mags and had select fire

the real issue is that it was a better battle rifle at a time when assault rifles were quickly proving themselves, and automatic fire was now mandatory
and the full sized round meant too much kick

i think the problem was that the boomers in nam were some limp wristed sissies that couldn't handle a real rifle and they wanted little assault "rifles" like the vc twinks got

>>64382425
i still feel like it's not that bad for the time. SKSs were still around in the 50's and 60's. The AR family has been in US military service for over 60 years at this point and it's still a fantastic service rifle; however maybe that's just a testament to how great the AR is.

>>64382425
the original m1 was supposed to be magazine fed the army wanted the clip so they didn't have to buy new pouches and belts.

>>64382413 (OP)
>was this really THAT bad? People born decades after it was in service talk about it like it went off in it's holster on it's own and blew up in people's hands
no they don't
the M14 was overrated by boomers for years and now the general opinion is that the AR-15 is more reliable when used with the right ammo

>>64382413 (OP)
The unhinged levels of seething hatred against the M14 are not deserved. When made properly it was an upgrade over the M1 and a pretty decent battle rifle.
It was still genuinely a sub-optimal choice from the standpoint of doctrine, design and quality control so some criticisms are absolutely valid.

>>64382413 (OP)
>6 MOA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mby4hOq-DpI

>>64382413 (OP)
Extremely mid and backwards facing. The writing was on the wall for intermediate cartridges at the end of WW2, the soviets and the rest of NATO saw that, but we threw our weight around to ensure full .30 cal stayed standard for the west. So already the whole trial is tainted by resistance to change and fighting the previous war, but then they groom the results to select the worst of the options. Even the fucking Springfield was more forward thinking, at least it had a pistol grip and in-line stock; to say nothing of the FAL or AR10. Like insisting everyone use Windows Vista, then on top of that demand they use Edge.

>>64382413 (OP)
It's manlets that can't handle REAL FUCKIN NATO

>>64382444
M1 garand that took box mags was the BM-59

The fact that no veterans issued with the M-14 bitched about it, tells you everything you need to know about revisionism conducted by limp wristed internet stars.
RIFLE IS FINE

>>64382413 (OP)
It would've kicked ass in WW2. That's all that can be said for it.

>>64382510
>revisionism
the M16 absolutely destroyed the M14 in trials, which is why they switched out in the first place
it isnt revisionism, its literally what their contemporaries were thinking, that the M14 was just not able to compete with assault rifle armed enemies

>>64382413 (OP)
>Not chambered in SIG USA 6.8 common
Dropped

>>64382513
it would have kicked ass in Korea. it just came out too late.

>>64382413 (OP)
It got mogged by the AK so hard it killed every other 308 battle rifle, intermediate chads win again

>>64382446
Show me a boomer who bitched about his M-14, I'll gladly wait for an example.
>>64382454
En-blocs were right for their time. People forget that mags weigh more AND require new webbing as well to be issued with it. This was in the early to mid 1930s when the only fucking money that existed was what FDR was inventing (keynesianism).

>>64382413 (OP)
The manufacturing contractors couldn't get their shit together, which would be one thing if it was a new, groundbreaking design, but that's a shitload of squeeze for decades old juice. Forgotten Weapons did a video covering the production problems.

As far as how bad one that's not screwed up from the factory is, it's not bad.

>>64382519
Korean War small arms tech was basically the same as WW2.

>>64382455
>M14 was overrated by boomers for years
Well, they were the ones who used them. Not once have I ever heard a Vietnam vet complain about the M-14. Historical revisionism: "let's ask the opinion of a bunch of retards who didn't actually use it in basic or in combat, that should provide valuable information for sure"

>>64382532
>Forgotten Weapons did a video
Yes, and you quoted him verbatim. Polly want a cracker?

>>64382510
>>64382530
>The fact that no veterans issued with the M-14 bitched about it
many, in fact, bitched about it
just like how many bitched about the M60, the M16, and other such weapons

sometimes you were handed a good one, sometimes a bad one
sometimes the ammo was good, sometimes it was shit
sometimes you got to properly service it, other times you didn't

doesn't change the fact that the M14 was obsolete, and the M16 was being poisoned

>>64382541
>reddit spacing
Youtube educated reddit retards leave now

>>64382544
newfag

>>64382530
but anon is right that its a 1930's design in the 60's. a big heavy rifle that cant into full auto going against kalashnikovs is just not fair.

>>64382539
Yeah I do, but all I'm getting here is a nigger.

>>64382544
its just regular spacing, you fucking new nigger

>>64382413 (OP)
The select fire was useless. it was a clean slate design at a time when combat rifles were the hot thing. We are coming back around to the battle rifle concept with heavier loads once again, but the barrel length is still an issue. Either you crush enemy anatomy with heavy loads, or you penetrate armor with zippy rounds.

>>64382446
Funny how every engagement since the 556 was introduced has been with countries whose medical infra could not support casualties from said caliber. Meanwhile we got shredded by females and twinks with literal soviet tech.

The design is just not as good compared to the 556 in <16" barrels. In more symmetric warfare an intermediate cartridge would do better. In typical Army fashion they absolutely fucked up the next gen infantry rifle selection process and now we have the shit spear.

>>64382496
>I've never handled a gun before
You could have just said that, but instead you spewed an essay of retarded regurgitated big-name youtube opinions

>>64382550
>>64382547
When reddit fags think they make the rules

>>64382556
>>64382558
>le everything is muh youtube
so what you're saying is that you don't own an M14
thats great, chang, keep stirring the pot

>>64382558
>when newfags think they blend in
go back

>>64382560
I'm saying I've watched the videos, I know the talking points, and not a single goddamn thing that's been posited has been anything deviating from the current popular pushed by youtubers who never used one.

>>64382562
Been here since before your balls dropped faggot

>>64382537
but you're just one of those retards parroting anecdotes.
>Not once have I ever heard

Soldiers had plenty of complaints about the M14, and they kept armorers busy: https://sofrep.com/gear/the-m14-was-a-terrible-service-rifle-an-in-depth-analysis/

>>64382572
>No, I'm an oldfag I swear!
that's what they always say

>>64382567
its almost as if both sides of youtuber's talking points are the fucking history of the weapons platform, huh?
next you're gonna bitch about someone getting all their ideas from a book, then from an instructor, then from handling the rifle themselves, right?

if the only god damn thing you can say is "but u is Utube!!!!!!", you don't have a fucking argument, you have the speech pattern of a jeet going "saar, i am manager, i am microsoft sar, you are virus, you virus saar"

>>64382425
>it was a 1930s design trying to compete in the 50s/60s.
This is the kindest way to simplify it. The rifle was not terrible nor unsafe, it was simply obsolescent the day it was made.
To contrast (and illustrate) the mediocrity of the M-14 program, one should look into the SALVO/SPIW program, because that actually pushed the envelope of firearms and cartridge design and manufacturing, and came very very close to succeeding.

>>64382413 (OP)
Uncontrollable recoil for your average skinny GI or Jarhead, the stock would rot after a few months in the jungle, super vulnerable to dirt clogging up its internals due to the massive ejection port, insignificant combat load due to the cartridge being too heavy. It was shit.

FACT: Rene Studler and everybody else involved in to M14 trials were communist sympathizers trying to make American infantry less effective against Soviets in the even of a Fulda gap confrontation
FACT: Anybody you see simping for the M14 are the successors of said commies, being either Russians or Chinks paid per post to cover the tracks of their predecessors
FACT: Due to the effects of the one child policy, there are some 50 million extra men in China than women
FACT: As a result, it can be reasonably concluded that anybody who observed whiteknighting the M14 has never had sex
And now you know, you too can be vigilant against virginal chinks.

>>64382413 (OP)
>was this really THAT bad?
something I've noticed for years now:
the M14/M1A is probably one of the most common rifles that people turn around sell when they have to thin their collection or just want to get rid of dead weight.
very few people aside from a few nostalgiaboomers ever actually seem to hang onto them for more than a couple years.
you can almost always guarantee one pops up in like new condition on a forum EE or in a consignment case at your local brick and mortar.
i think ultimately the garand is seen as venerable and forgiven for its shortcomings considering the time it came from and what it was during wwii, whereas the m14 is just entirely superfluous and outdated.
not bad, not great, just lukewarm and mediocre.

>>64382599
>uncontrollable recoil
Its in .308 as opposed to .30-06, it is a full size rifle (so full weight reducing felt recoil), it has a gas system that absorbs recoil. You would have to be a woman or child to find the M14 has uncontrollable recoil.

>>64382603
now try that in full auto

>>64382614
You're not hitting anything at 300 yards with an AKM in full auto either

>>64382603
Your opinion on anything in any caliber full auto is irrelevant because you've never shot anything full auto to begin with.

>>64382413 (OP)
>>64382455
>>64382487
Unless you want to be a marksman with a heavy rifle it's just outdated.
It would have been more fondly remembered if it came out during the Korean War and had retired by 1960.

>>64382618
and in close range, with such a gimped mag, the M14 is even worse
but you're just going to then say something retarded to justify the M14 being great at close range though, aren't you?

>>64382603
You're forgetting the average dude was like 5'9 and 150lb. Today they're called twinks for some reason, but that's what adult men were built like

>>64382625
His point does still stand, stop arguing like a woman

>>64382631
no, his point actually doesn't stand
if you gleam "woman" from being correct, you're a momma's boy

>>64382625
>say something retarded to justify the M14 being great at close range though, aren't you?
Sorry i didn't realize that the AKM was the better close range fighting rifle, just let me remove that bayonet from your gut.

>>64382598
Nah it would have been fine in the Korean War where it would have faced a lot of old stock soviet weapons.
It's bad rep comes from Vietnam. So it should have come out earlier and been retired earlier.

>>64382636
i said retarded, damn it! not correct!

>>64382635
>but you're just going to then say something retarded to justify the M14 being great at close range though, aren't you?
Yeah, only a scorned bitch talks like that

>>64382446
>>64382628
I would guarantee pound for pound every single boomer and greatest gen would have significantly more strength from growing up with a wrench or a baseball bat in their hand than /k/ommandos who have more time holding an xbox controller than anything else.
Their generations weren't known for having an obesity epidemic.

>>64382647
yeah
fuck off boomer
but yeah

>>64382647
Definitely stronger pound for pound, but 150 pounds is 150 pounds. That's not that much for a sub 9lb squad support weapon in 7.62 real fuckin nato

>>64382413 (OP)
>was this really THAT bad?
Yes
>heavy
>inaccurate
>almost uncontrollable in full auto
And the main concern, weight. The weight of the rifle combined with the ammo made it untenable for the average soldier. It's the same problem today with the XM7.

>>64382625
>ERMAHGERD da enemy is too close ahhh
JUST USE A SUBGUN OR HANDGUN BITCH

>>64382663
>The weight of the rifle combined with the ammo made it untenable for the average soldier
And yet they did fine with the M1.

>>64382413 (OP)
All the military needs for small arms is
>556 for regular troops
>308 for DMR/LMG
>50 cal for HMG/AMR
>9mm for pistol/SMG

>>64382447
The SKS was almost immediately replaced by the AK, and only used as long as it was due to economic factors.

>>64382677
I think everyone should be forced to use 22lr so we can prove who has the best soldiers

>>64382672
Flak jackets weren't issued in WW2 and the M14s magazines had more ammo

>>64382692
>22 only meta
ENTER: AMERICAN 180

>>64382672
the M1 garand was fine in WW2 where everyone else only had bolt-action rifles and CQC weapons like SMGs were limited to just 1-2 per squad, so the weight was worth what you got

but the M14 was entering a world where the soviets were pushing the AK which had lighter rounds

>>64382695
Flak jackets were not normal issue for infantry and were in use during WW2.
Standard ammo load was roughly the same weight wise.

>>64382413 (OP)
Mogged by FAL, G3 and AKM. Yeah, it was really that bad. The worst mainstream Cold War era service rifle.

Wrong kid died.

>>64382413 (OP)
Mini 14 better

>>64382413 (OP)
this shit was adopted over not only the ar10 but the fal, explain that

>>64382530
Keynesianism has brought the unimaginable wealth and standard of living that could only be dreamed of ~80 years ago. Neoliberalism and terminal boomerism decided to fuck that all up, and we have yet to recover. Austrian School and LOLbertarian fags can get fucked.

>>64382413 (OP)
The safety was unironically one of its aspects that worked perfectly, and the action is retardedly strong.

>>64382425
This. Best rifle of WWII. Unfortunately, it missed WWII.

>>64382510
Hardly any actually used one in the field. It was on its way out when Vietnam started heating up. Most of them only shot one in boot camp.

>>64382519
This too.

>>64382532
Even the ones that were built right, weren't great. You'll never hear the argument that it was in service for less than a decade and the rest of the free world ignored it because it was the best, but that's the argument that some people unintentionally make. I can go into the details about why it wasn't great yet again, but anyone that's been here for any length of time has already seen it and the copers that were never issued one, or had to maintain a number of them, or own one that they've shot once or twice, will just keep coping. It's a wasted argument.

>>64382413 (OP)
The actual issue is US infantry squad early in the war lacked a belt fed automatic.

>>64382599
>the stock would rot after a few months in the jungle
This is a major element desu, it was a rifle designed with a European battlefield in mind and then went ahead and got deployed in the most damp and humid biome imaginable, at a point where the USA realized it wouldn't be fighting in Europe but in little proxy wars in the arse end of the world. The stock was just way too liable to warp, crack or rot which was a huge pain in the ass logistically.

>>64382413 (OP)
I think it's weird that they made a new rifle almost exactly the same as the old rifle.
Might as well have BM-59ed the old Garands.

>>64382683
you can say the same thing about the m14 and m16 however it just took longer for the AR to really replace it. m14 entered in 1959, AR entered in 1963

>>64382838
that's not very weird. Makes sense to keep the new rifle similar to the old one, for familiarity's sake.

>>64382683
>The SKS was almost immediately replaced by the AK, and only used as long as it was due to economic factors.
China liked the SKS (in their thinking, it was a better weapon for peasants) and used it until the 1980s.

>>64382700
>AMERICAN 180
We used to be a proper country.

>>64382719
*misses*

>>64382808
the US army standardized the M60 in 1960, only 3 years after the M14
the gulf of tonkin incident which marked overt and direct US involvement in vietnam was in 1964

the M60 was only platoon level on paper, in practice it was common to dissolve the platoon GPMG and hand it out to squads
so the M60 was in service as a SAW on pretty much the first day of the war

>>64382666
Literally can’t, got replaced by the M14!

>>64382666
israelis armed with a mixed unit of FALs and uzis were consistently outgunned by all-AK egyptians
basically only half the squad could actually engage the enemy on equal terms at any given moment
at close range, only the ones with uzis stood a chance, at long range only the FALs
this would be a major reason for them to ditch mixed units in favor of assault-rifle only units

>>64382413 (OP)
It was a fat pig and the m16 was an agile ballerina next to it.

>>64382413 (OP)
It wasn't that bad, but everything else from around that time was just better. It was a WW2 rifle essentially. It should have been deployed a lot more as a DMR than it was, though. That's a role it absolutely excels at, and there definitely were (and still are) enough of them around. I think if they went with the .280 cartridge like the euros wanted instead of 7.62, it would have been a more solid infantry rifle.

>>64382544
>that post
>plebbit spacing
No. Lurkmoar dumbass newfag.

There must have been experience with wooden-stocked rifles in the jungles of the Solomon Islands and New Guinea, but was it dismissed and ignored as a localized problem?

>>64382700
I'm pretty sure the Croats actually used local copies of these things in combat during the various wars during/following the breakup of Yugoslavia.

Göran Kjellgren (George Kellgren) of IntraDynamics/IntraTec/Grendel/KelTec devised a similar weapon he proposed as a standard infantry rifle in the late 1970s.
It fired a long conical .17cal rimfire round the standard projectile was solid copper or brass and almost as long as the 26mm case. Compared to .17HMR it was slower but lobbed a MUCH heavier projectile.
The rifle was supposed to be issued with disposable single-use plastic half-moon shaped 50-round mags that were delivered loaded and sealed with one of those plastic tabs that magpul would proceed to rip off.

>>64382806
>Best XXX of WWII. Unfortunately, it missed WWII.
Many such cases!

>>64382544
That's not reddit spacing you doublenigger, also youtube did do one thing, it lets you see rifles get thrown in the mud and proves which ones jam and don't. It's basically just the AR platform which doesn't shit itself once it gets dirty.

>>64382637
Unfortunately, Ordnance had lost the keys to the time machine under the Pentagon, so there was no way for a rifle adopted in 1957, to be used in a war that ended in 1953.

>>64382446
Real. Boomers were nothing compared their WW2 fighting fathers

>>64383674
Well yeah, boomers are fucking hippies

>>64383649
Well that's too bad ain't it? A lot of times whether a weapons system is praised or not is about timing. Modern standards has most past weapons systems being mediocre or shit.

>>64382413 (OP)
The M-14 is a fantastic rifle for finding out who gets their opinions from YouTubers.

>>64382496
>fighting the previous war
If only they had tried to fight the previous war.
Hell, if only they had tried to fight WW1. No, they were trying to fight the anglo-boer war with their battle rifle.

ITT: anons regurgitate Ian McCollum's opinion on the M-14 and found a way to argue in spite of being in almost total agreement. Worse than /arg/

>>64383691
That's like saying every millennial is part of Nigger Lives Matter

>>64384002
I think it's the easiest piece of military equipment, at least for rifles, for finding blatant copy/paste opinions.
Throw in all the redditors from single mother households and you have this fucking shit show

>>64382602
>not bad, not great, just lukewarm and mediocre
That's pretty much the fuck of it. It was a mid-tier design with drawbacks that after 55 years of advancing material science, firearm design, and technology has advanced to a mid-tier design.

>>64382647
Greatest Gen all grew up with malnutrition issues and the Boomers were raised by tv.

>>64383819
> Modern standards has most past weapons systems being mediocre or shit.
There are always exceptions.

>>64384266
>Boomers were raised by tv
They had TV in most homes by that point, but the only influence TV had on boomers was Gunsmoke and that's why they love revolvers

>>64382413 (OP)
Soldiers in Vietnam appreciated 7.62 in Vietnam for the ability to shoot through cover. There were a lot of wooden pillbox bunkers in the jungle. Jerry Shriver in MACV SOG ordered a .444 Marlin stateside that he wanted to use as his "bunker buster." One of the few accounts of a lever-action being used in Vietnam.

>>64384703
There’s examples of the M14 being used in a shorter modified config among special forces

Funny how the users of the period loved it but faggots online who've never handled one know everything about them

>>64384793
>Funny how people who had no comparison loved it

It should be noted that the M14 was also supposed to fill the niche of the M1, M3 Grease Gun, M1 carbine, and the BAR. Which should be considered when asking if it was, historically, the right gun for the time (it wasn't).

>>64384917
Better qualification of judgement than a graduate of a 30 minute course on youtube university

>>64382447
The SKS was around for so long because it was a weapon designed for retarded conscripts who's leaders didn't think could be trusted with automatic fire.

>>64382539
>no you can't refer to someone who did the research and put it in an easily accessible video!

>>64382413 (OP)

It would have been a great rifle but the AR was made pretty much at the same time making it instantly obsolete. It was along longer which was fine if it was around in WWII but in the new environments the extra length was a substantial negative.

Great gun but released too late.

the OG star wars series were great movies but if they were released today they'd be considered cheap b or even c level movies because tech is better now.

>>64382413 (OP)
>was this really THAT bad?
Yes. Trying to replace all rifles, SMGs, and LMGs in military service with a badly built select-fire M1 Garand that took (bad) 20-round box mags, that shot like 10MOA brand new, and was built to meet delusional flat-range marksmanship standards/doctrine, in an era where assault rifles were already becoming the norm was genuinely a fucking terrible idea. pic unrelated....

>>64385059

I can tell you're racist from how to type

>>64382555
>We are coming back around to the battle rifle concept with heavier loads once again

No we aren't, the US Army has decided to go that way and literally everyone else is ignoring it or outright saying its a bad idea. The US Marines aren't following suite and there is zero interest from anyone else in NATO.

>>64382683
The Chinese Type 56 really only began being produced in the 50s
But maybe that's why they didn't do so well in Vietnam

>>64385011
You cannot make it the entire basis of your knowledge. let me guess, you listened to "the experts" and wore a mask 5 years ago?

>>64385011
McCollum hasn't once in his videos ever cited a single source. Muppet

>>64382413 (OP)
Yes. It had a litany of problems the FAL and G3 did not have.

>>64385341
>G3
Gross

>>64382880
>Makes sense to keep the new rifle similar to the old one, for familiarity's sake.
this is the meta for getting the US military to acquire your new gun. the only reason why the HK416 was finally approved to replace the AR15 in the weapon trials was because they paid homage and made it look like an AR15

>>64385341
the G3 wasn't out yet and the FALs of the time were SLIGHTLY worse in testing. like barely worse, and the fact the the M14 was American pushed it over the finish line. most of the problems that weren't shared by the garand were QC problems.

>>64385394
Everyone harps on McNamara because of his retard units. But a big one was making the war department efficient "more like a business." Government weapon inspection procedure was effectively gutted.

>>64382541
I feal like this could do with some more greater thans

>>64385402
Pic related

>>64385394
because the american military is obsessed with forward assists which the fal and ar10 didnt have

>>64385713
This post made me learn that the FAL doesn't have a reciprocating charging handle. Then why is optics mounting so dumb on them?

>>64384793
See >>64382578
Read the paper yourself of you want to, too
Most marines hated the m14, especially for being heavy and unreliable, wanting the m16 instead
Only 4 or so out of more than 60 said they actually liked it.

>>64385732
Because the dust cover is literally just a bit of metal that slides over the action. It’s not held in place by anything and just kinda jiggles there

>full-power rifle cartridge
>long barrel
>still inaccurate as shit
How do you manage this?

>>64386594
what is it about either of those things that you think encourages accuracy?

>>64386601
Centuries of experience and examples. The freedom to manufacture a stiff barrel with quality harmonics, since you're not as limited by the size and weight of the rifle. The fact that the US just had the Garand, which outshot the M14s easily.

>>64382555
>Meanwhile we got shredded by females and twinks with literal soviet tech.
Who is we?

>>64386594
Ask the G3 and FAL.

>>64386488
To go along with that, I'd wager a paycheck that a good chunk of those accuracy complaints could have been traced to deranged sights with a thorough investigation. (Yes, I'm the anon from the other thread, and I'm the guy that had to deal with weapons with accuracy issues, and it was usually damaged sights.) There were plenty of other things that could cause a wandering zero, but the sights (specifically that shitty front sight mount) were the most common cause. There are other things that can go wrong with dedicated match conditioned weapons but that's not what we're talking about here.
>bullets contacting the flash hider
Maybe one in 30 or 40 rifles, as received from Crane, which is way the fuck too much. It's not a problem with NM spec flash hiders, which are simply reamed wider. The basic issue one was too tight. You could actually eyeball these on the rack because there would be streaks of gilding metal on the interior of the hider. I saw a deadlined one from USS Sacramento that had been severely damaged by a bullet strike, but only one of hundreds. Usually it was just a graze. Some of these would actually group okay, but the group would be so far off from point of aim that the sights couldn't compensate for it. That's technically a manufacturing issue, but really it's a design one.
>wooden stock fuckery
The rifle was designed for a plastic stock from the start, but initially they couldn't make a good one. They eventually did. They get a pass on this and there's no reason to deal with it today. Wood for show, plastic for a pro. The trigger assembly's clamping pressure will still fail over time and fuck your zero up with a plastic stock, but that doesn't happen overnight.

Again, not deal breakers for range toys, but this was (and should have been) unacceptable for service rifles when the M14 was introduced.

>>64386608
>The freedom to manufacture a stiff barrel with quality harmonics
making a barrel longer doesn't make it stiffer or easier to manufacture

>>64386620
Making the kind of barrel you've been making for a long time now is easier to make.

>>64382881
The Chinese were the only ones who loved the SKS. Even Vietnam ditched the SKS the moment they had AK-47/AKMs in large numbers. China learnt the hard way when they tried to invade Vietnam and got their ass kicked by Home Guard Vietnamese who were armed with AKMs. The SKS is a good rifle but compared to the AK47 or any post ww2 rifle, it was lacking. The SKS was made for ww2.
>>64385002
The SKS was designed to be a better SVT40. Automatic fire wasn't a thought for a frontline general purpose rifle. Automatic fire was only used in mind for sappers or shock troops which is what the smgs like the PPSh41 or PPS43 were used and what the AK47 was originally designed to replace. The Russians were just smart enough to realize that an AK47 could do the same job as the SKS and do the job of the smgs.

>>64386611
The G3 was actually accurate compared to the FAL.

>>64385713
Early ar10s have a forward assist that when away when they went to the current t style charging handle.

>>64386662
And could be fairly easily free floated and it could readily accept different stocks and furniture and optics. Genuinely it still holds up when compared to modern battle rifles, which is a testament to old HKs autism

>>64386652
The SKS was designed to be the better version of the Mosin carbines. A short lightweight rifle for rear guard use.
The AK was the replacement for the SVT and Mosin.

>>64386693
roller delay action is fundamentally inaccurate. that's why the PSG-1 needed a different bolt

>>64386693
The only real issue I have with the G3 is the charging handle can be a little iffy and its annoying racking it at times and mounting an optic is shit but honestly the G3 is a great rifle and I think the FAL is a worse rifle when compared to the G3. My father loved that rifle during the Croatian war of Independence/Yugo war.

>>64386695
I'm pretty sure the original vision was for the SKS to replace all rifles and for the AK-47 to replace all sub-machine guns. That's consistent with how the CIA published reports on the AK-47 in the late 40s, describing it as an SMG.

>>64386703
The CIA was staffed with retards.
The SKS was to replace all carbines.
The AK was to replace all rifles. By the time Kalashnikov joined the trials the requirement to replace SMGs had been long discarded.

>>64386695
>The AK was the replacement for the SVT and Mosin.
No it wasn't. The AK47 was designed and originally designed to be used in the same role as the ppsh41 and pps43. The AK47 was envisioned to be used by sappers and shock troops and the SKS would have replaced any of the front line rifles like the hundreds of Mosins variants and the few SVT40 rifles. The SKS only entered use as a rear guard rifle when the AK47 was in full production because it took some time to fully arm and equip soviet troops with the AK47. The moment the AK47 entered its final stages of completion, the Russians right away realized that the AK47/AKM was a better rifle and it did just as good as of a job as a main issue rifle as the SKS and it did a good job as a SMG. The SKS was literally designed to replace the SVT40. The man who worked on the SVT40 literally made the SKS and he made it using his knowledge and experience from developing the SVT40 and the PTRS41 to make the SKS.

There is a reason why China copied the early Soviet adoption of the AK47 and SKS. China followed the early Soviet idea of the SKS being the main issue rifle and the AK47/Type56 being issued to squad leads, sappers and shock troops. The Russians just ditched that idea early because they didn't care about making a "peasant's rifle" like the Chinese because they knew the AK47 with its multi-purpose role and mag fed ability out weighed any benefit that the SKS would have.

>>64386713
Might want to read some actual sources on the trials. Start with Bolotin's work. The AK was always intended to be the main rifle.

>>64386713
>i touched you're waifu

>>64386662
>The G3 was actually accurate
It was the same as any other battle rifle, accurate enough for military purposes.

>>64386777
>battle rifle
No such thing and never has been