/k/ - Weapons

>>545135

It's a smoothbore, though. There's no point to it.

>>545142

>It's a smoothbore

I can't read: the post

>Binary trigger only

Can't wait for dozens of accidents.

>>545144

>i cant wait to buy rounds for $5 a piece to save me from paying a $200 tax stamp

Well it is certainly something different, sadly I can see this being a commercial failure because normalfags don't buy different. I will probably buy one because in 50 years when we're all still calling each other faggots I am sure there will be young people looking at it like we look at the gyrojet now.

this is some shit I expect to see at california. Asking the Commissar if your weapon is allowed for peasants.

Saw people were saying it was Keyholing like crazy on the paper targets.

>Hill & Mac haven't pushed out their Sturmgewehr yet

oof

>>545262

never ever

>>545135

> The ATF confirmed that a firearm equipped with a stock and a barrel featuring straight cut lands and grooves is defined as a “firearm,” and is not a rifle or a shotgun.

But you can't convert your rifle into one of these, right? You have to get 'em from the factory like that?

>>545144

Spin isn't needed after the bullet enters flight. It's mostly there because forces are erratic at the muzzle. A "tail" is only doing anything while the bullet is exiting the barrel, and after the bullet goes subsonic.

>>545264

This topic is interesting. It's a very big deal, because this basically means SBR will be off the shelf, well, I-Can't-Believe-It's-Not-SBR.

>>545327

No.

The spin imparted on the bullet stabilizes it for the entire flight against all influences, take wind as an example. If projectiles were stable and would not tumble, you wouldn't need rifling at all, you'd be fine with a really good muzzle brake or a ported slide. And yet a musket with a blank barrel would still see any projectile go haywire.

5.45x39 has a reputation for tumbling due to barely enough spin to stabilize it in flight, and that gets shot out of guns like the AK74 with its fuckhuge muzzlebrake.

>>545135

So what is the point aside from being able to SBR it? It's not like that makes it commiefornia legal or something.

>>545327

Mid-air turbulence would throw any projectile off-balance and make it tumble. This is detrimental for ballistics, because it makes trajectory unpredictable. Muskets had shit accuracy because they used ball projectiles, which gain spin randomly while in barrel and magnus effect causes its trajectory to weer off in random direction. Stabilized projectile doesn't have this problem and its flight path is tight and predictable. Spin is a poor method of stabilizing the projectile because it picks up sideways torque easily from gyroscopic precession effect, instead of rotating about its frontal axis it starts rotating about angled axis. It's better than having it tumble randomly because even this off-center rotation will cancel out making its trajectory tight and predictable, if with more drag compared to perfectly stabilized projectile. Due to rotation and precession it is also pretty much guaranteed to hit the target at oblique angle, unless it was a point blank shot and the projectile didn't had the time to precess. Perfect projectile would be a fin stabilized sabot, hence this is what tanks routinely use.

>>545350

Is the German wrong? Or are you just doing that cause it's such general knowledge you shouldn't have to say it?

>>545327

are you brain damaged? that's the only option i can think of. of course spin is needed, common rifle bullets are unbalanced as hell. you need something like an air pellet shape to get any form of accuracy, and even then, spin stabilization makes them even more accurate.