-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Uh oh, they've discovered Slidefire stocks
- Thread starter WBspectrum
- Start date
dcmdon
NES Member
Its nothing. My m11 with a Lage speed bolt and a MacJack runs 1200 rpm. Ha.
There is a very interesting vid on the slidefire web site of a guy shooting one with what appears to be a belt fed AR upper.
M60
NES Member
How's anybody going to feed that AR at a rate of 800 rpm? Sounds like a spray and pray novelty item.
Think one shot,one kill.
Why stop there? How about another order of magnitude? 90,000 rounds per minute!
This isn't good for us at all. Hopefully they don't do anything in regard to this. Mall ninja + novelty is what this product is, nothing more.
dcmdon
NES Member
You have to get beyond your MA way of thinking. How do you know he didn't own the land a mile past the lake.
From what I saw, the angle was acute enough so the bullets went straight in. You have to get down very low to skip a bullet off the water.
dcmdon
NES Member
While I agree with you. (And also suggest M60 read up on the British colonial use of the Maxim in Africa) The difference between infantry and most of us is the logistics system that can readily replenish all this fun.
Even still. I bought 2 of them. I figure that after the ATF makes them a NFA item and production ceases, prices will go through the roof. I don't feel bad about speculating because they are still readily available.
Unless they do what they did with the last good bumpfire stocks. After the ATF overturned their own decision and decided they WERE machine guns they went through the company records and contacted all the people who bought them and made them turn in the spring and plate mechanism that made them function. They weren't given an option to register them. They were just left with a plastic stock they couldn't even mount anything in without the spring and plate mechanisms.
dcmdon
NES Member
I've got a M11/9 with a Lage upper and a Lage .22 conversion kit for that. Lots of fun.
Here's my Manhattanite brother in law running it. I've got him hooked good. He loves the .22 MG because its cheap to run.
[video=youtube_share;5AfXc2qxUug]http://youtu.be/5AfXc2qxUug[/video]
Thats a valid point. I considered it, but I'm willing to roll the dice on that since I'll never be able to justify the cost of a registered M16.
Here's my Manhattanite brother in law running it. I've got him hooked good. He loves the .22 MG because its cheap to run.
[video=youtube_share;5AfXc2qxUug]http://youtu.be/5AfXc2qxUug[/video]
Thats a valid point. I considered it, but I'm willing to roll the dice on that since I'll never be able to justify the cost of a registered M16.
Last edited:
M60
NES Member
My comment was from a civillian perspective. The millitary doesn't have to find and pay for ammo. We do. To be effective with automatic type fire, you must practice, practice, practice, with lots of ammo that you must first find, find, and buy, buy, buy. The spray and pray method is not a new method, but for civillian application it doesn't make much sense since aquiring the bulk quantities of ammo required and the funds to pay for the thousands and thousands of rounds needed to gain any sort of reasonable effectivness (that is to say, the abillity to hit what you aim at), not to mention the time investment at the range that is needed, in most cases isn't likely to be probable. Finding a range that will allow you to practice the spray and pray method will be problem unto itself as well.The end result that is probable is wasted money and wasted ammunition that very well could have been utilised to otherwise effect a possitve outcome for the shooter. As a former active duty machine gunner and a present civillian shooter, I believe that the aforementioned will absolutely minimize effectiveness when civillians utilise the spray and pray method. One shot,one kill can't be categorised as anything other than 100% effective and in a time of dangerous personal crisis such as a firefight, anything less that 100% effective will probably cost you dearly.
Except being illegal. It is not illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts.
- - - Updated - - -
No, let's make it really really scary for them: 90,001 rounds per minute.
dcmdon
NES Member
A buddy of mine was in SF. When he went in somewhere with his small team, they had no logistical support. Their ammo was limited to what they could carry on their backs. He said that full auto was limited to only covering fire when they advanced or retreated. Nearly everything was aimed fire at a known target. There was no "shooting into a tree line".
Don
Don
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 6,920
- Likes
- 615
I think that example is exactly the situation that anyone will face if the shtf, where they will be severely limited to the ammo they can actually carry on them. I have actually been thinking about this lately while trying to stockpile ammo. Sure it's awesome to have cases of ammo, but what the heck good is it if you have no way to take it with you? So inmo, a slidefire type of stock, or FA would be perfect to lay down cover fire IF you were in a secure bunker of sorts with all of the ammo to work with. If you can only carry a couple of hundred rounds, then you can't afford to waste even one shot.
Study after study has shown that full auto is a waste of ammo but for providing covering fire (see, e.g., Vietnam conflict) - people tend to keep hunkered down when rounds keep whizzing over their heads.
To be targeting a specific person at distance with full auto is dumb.
And that clip brought me to this...
[video=youtube_share;hm3qQyWXoe0]http://youtu.be/hm3qQyWXoe0[/video]
California Assemblywoman Fiona Ma tried to ban music... Later she found out that was unconstitutional. /facepalm
[video=youtube_share;hm3qQyWXoe0]http://youtu.be/hm3qQyWXoe0[/video]
California Assemblywoman Fiona Ma tried to ban music... Later she found out that was unconstitutional. /facepalm
Last edited by a moderator:
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
M60
NES Member
I think that you'll agree that the majority of shooters here are not very inexperienced at spray and pray practical application. I think that you'll further agree that we can call most any shooter here that can hit what he aims at consistantly a one shot ,one kill capable shooter. Have you ever seen what usually happens to a M16 spray and pray shooter when up against a one shot, one kill shooter ? Add to this, that the m60 machine gun carries a 200 round assault pouch for sustained fire.The AR 15 carries 30 rounds which demonstrates an inabillity to sustain fire. M60 800 rpm, Ar 30/800 of a minute of fire.You do the math. It's 13.33 rounds a second which equates to far less than 3 seconds of sustained firepower from the slidefire AR, then your rifle is empty, while the one shot kill shooter is still shooting at you and you are spending time being demoralized by you misses, while you are trying to reload under fire. Not my idea of a good time.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 6,920
- Likes
- 615
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
NHCraigT
NES Member
You are referring to an entirely different situation and condition.
The other Manufacturer (that you are referring to), had their issue - because the sample that they orignally submitted to the BATF (that was approved), was not the same unit that ended up later being mass produced, and sold to the public.
That was the basis for the BATF rescinding their approval.
The mass produced model was NOT the same as the model that they earlier had approved.
Different issue all together.
Last edited:
M60
NES Member
One shot = one kill is no myth my friend. A very good friend of mine proved this on 93 different occasions during his three tours in Viet Nam prior to his passing a few years ago. If you believe that one mag (30 rounds = one casualty ) I suggest more range time, more qualified instruction and appropriate ammo for each job. Experience under fire makes a world of difference as well. I do agree with you that a .556 is not a .308, 30-06, or a 300 Win Mag. Where we seem to dissagree is that a .556 doesn't need to be those other calibers with todays technology in bullet making. There is a different bullet for each different job. See: DYNAMIC RESEARCH TECHNOLOGIES bullets for example. I keep a supply of these on hand just for those times of need along with other types, depending on the situation. For the bad guys wearing plates try Federal 62 gr.green tip. There is a bullet for every job and I feel that it's my job to have the correct tools ( bullets ) on hand to get the job done. Anything less is irresponsibillity on my part.
I agree, but again only in part, with your theory of the goal being to fire + maneuver. I believe that the total goal is to fire, disable/kill the enemy at hand + maneuver.
I agree completely with your statement that we're not talking about defeating waves of Chinese regulars in mass attcks. I also believe that we can never lose sight of the actual goal, the sole reason for engaging in the first place, which is in fact defeating with one shot, placed with as much accuracy as possible at a time.
dcmdon
NES Member
I did not know this.
How did the production version vary from the sample submitted to the ATF Tech branch?
In case anyone doesn't know the other stock was the Akins Accelerator. It used a spring to push the action and the trigger forward against the shooters trigger finger after recoil pushed it back. The problem was the spring. The slidefire does not have a spring. You use your support hand to provide the forward pressure.
In fact, the Akins Accelerator is being reintroduced without a spring.
http://fostechoutdoors.com/shop/catalog/springless-aa2-2-1.html
Don
M60
NES Member
I'm certainly not suggesting that you must be a sniper to be proficient and I hope that you're not suggesting that you must be a sniper to hit what you aim at either. Responsible practice to maximise ones proficiency should be a self inflicted requirement however if one is going to take on the responsibillity of having and possibly using this type of weapon for self defense. You say above that one mag, one kill theory is widely taught. This theory is equal to teaching you that your shots will miss your intended target 96.6 % of the time. This level of proficiency is not even acceptable on the rifle range in boot camp, which is a place where many shooters are shooting for the first time in their lives. If one is to hit the intended target only 3.3 % of the time, it is advisable that they refrain from engaging since the odds of their survival are about equal to their abillity to hit the target, which you have stated to be a probabillity rate of 3.3%. As I said, for the inexperienced , the stress of being under fire will probably decrease the hit factor, but a 3.3% success rate doesn't leave much room for survival probabillity. No matter how much you and I debate here, it is non negotiable fact that noise from the rifle will not stop the enemy. To that end if we are to to defend ourselves with noise 96.6% of the time and hits only 3.3% of the time we are in fatal trouble before the fight even begins.
I am wondering, with regard to the woman who shot the bad guy five times with her .38, was the gun a 1 7/8 " snub? were the bullets lead round nose ? Where did she hit the bad guy 5 times ? Could it be that she used the wrong caliber because the gun shop suggested that the alloy.38 was correct for her? Could it be that like many people, she has never been to the firing line for practice. As in most shootings , thee are to many variables That we have no answers to and Monday morning quarterbacing is not something that I am fond of.
Heart or brain stem shots are not the only way to achieve one shot kills. That's classroom talk rather than real life talk. Way to many troops have been killed with one shot in combat that were'nt hit in the heart or brain stem for that theory to be valid. I suspect that's why the classroom also teaches "center mass shots", which offer a much larger taget than the heart or brain stem. Perhaps the instructer should be challenged regarding heart and brain stem shots verses center mass shots. Why teach both if the first theory is so exclusive and bomb proof ?
Since we will likely be in a urban setting if the SHTF rather than in a combat zone, I respectfuly submit to you that you may want to completely rethink the 300 meter shot theory. If the bad guy is that far away you are not suppose to be shooting at him in this country. If the 300 meter situation that you referred to should arise, also know before you shoot that 300 meter shots at walking targets will not be defined as a luxury in the United States. Here we call it called murder.
Lastly, I'll bet that you will find no employee, including the sales staff of the Plate company that touts its effectiveness, that is willing to dawn the plates while the best shooter in the country takes one shot and only one to prove or disprove the claim of just how many shots are needed. In short, in my humble opinion, you have much more faith in the product than the manufacturer does.
The most important information that we have bantered back and forth over the last few days is that in the end lots of noise (gunfire) won't protect your life. The simple truth in the end has always been and will always be that we must hit the intended target effectively, perod.
Similar threads
