a reply to: LOSTinAMERICA
The mattel rumor....
Oh and it's GARAND not GRAND....
And FWIW a round that "bounces around inside your target" is actually the preferred and ONLY sure method to do enough damage without plain proper
bullet placement to drop a target in a single shot!
Oh and BTW that particular gem of "common knowledge" (which if you learn nothing else from my posts please pick up the FACT that in the firearms
world, and most other technical fields with a large percentage of hobbyists who are NOT trained or educated in the field, "common knowledge" is
almost ALWAYS outright CRAP! That's right folks... chances are if EVERYONE knows it or that's how the person arguing with you prefaces what they
are about to say... it's nearly always WRONG!) applies to the .22 Long rifle in that for years people have called it the ideal assassin's weapon
because it has enough energy to penetrate a skull, but doesn't exit out the back because it lacks the energy to break through the back side of the
person's skull. Instead "common knowledge" says that it bounces around repeatedly and randomly destroying massive amounts of the brain also
inhabitng the now single side perforated skull!
So... for those keeping score.... the first 3 things you mentioned were all BS, and even funnier, thing 3 if true would actually make it one of the
more effective rounds on earth of ANY CALIBER for near instant one shot stops! But, it doesn't even apply to the round in question! Oh and in case
you're wondering... yep even if we were talking about .22 LR it would still be .... WRONG!!
The reality is the AK isn't a one shot stop gun either.... neither is the Fal, M1a/M14, or the G3
In case you're wondering why I mentoned these three rifles together it's because they all chamber 7.62x51 NATO, Oh and BTW the 7.62 NATO round is
NOT a full power rifle rifle round! It's directly based off the m2 loading of the .30 '06 round which was a Reduced power and bullet weight loading
of the .30 '06 designed specifically to be fired out of the garand rifle which would suffer catastrophic damage if one were to fire the actual FULL
POWER m1 loading of .30 '06 as the 1919 browning 1918 BAR and 1903 Springfield rifle were designed to and could safely fire thousands of rounds of!
Interestingly the US did have a rifle and lmg combination that could successfully, safely, and without undue wear or outright catastrophic failure
fire the m1 loading of .30 '06... That rifle/lmg was the Johnson Rifle/LMG! Interestingly in the last head to head shootout between the johnson
rifle and the garand before the US entered world war 2 the Johnson Rifle was found to be every bit as good of a rifle as the Garand, scoring was so
close between the two that for any practical purpose they were equally good..... This in itself is impressive.... It's even more impressive once you
find out that this last head to head shootout featured a set of Johnson demo guns that had several thousand rounds through the NEWEST parts on the
gun, and some parts had seen much more wear than this! Especially when you consider that not only were the multiple garands factory new with
basically unlimited spares, technical staffing, and babying to keep them in PEAK condition throughout the competition, but in addition Johnson had
virtually no spares less guns all of which had thousands of rounds through their barrels with which to shoot the same courses with, AND suffered
CONSTANT and repeated sabotage before and during the competition!
(Oh unlike your "common knowledge" a little group known as congress held hearings on this debacle and I'm only relating the stuff even congress was
forced to agree actually occurred, not any anecdotes or unsubstantiated allegations.)
Wanna know something else cool?
Take a look at that Mattel gun....
Guess which of those two rifles it is based on? hint: NOT THE GARAND!!
Oh and you know the modularity craze that's so hot right now? Yeah we could have had a gun that had all that stuff in 1938 if it weren't for some
really stupid empire building inside the ordnance department.... Also unlike the garand, which it and the follow on m14/m1a are frankly a nightmare
to produce on any large scale, the Johnson weapons were very much designed with mass production in mind! They could be produced cheaper, faster,
with less specialized machinery, and by much less highly trained and in short supply workers!
Even funnier... the AR 10/15 basically stripped out every good feature the original gun had! (Many of which, but not nearly all are just barely
starting to reappear in the johnson rifle/lmg great grandchildren)
Matter of fact the FCG Jim Sullivan takes credit for "inventing" is in many ways nothing more than a modernized johnson LMG FCG (which in 1941 was
open bolt for full automatic and closed bolt for semi automatic fiire)
Also it had quick change barrels, and interestingly in later versions direct impingement assistance to it's short recoil operating method....
Oh ... and btw ... 7.62x51 NATO m80 rounds are horribly sucktastic especially for their weight and total recoil impulse! Guess what though? You
can take comfort in knowing every last "bad thing" people like you tout about the inferiority of 5.56 is also WRONG.... and hilariously enough the
sucktastic performance 5.56 can exhibit is tied to the EXACT SAME ACTUAL CAUSES as the totally laughable performance of 7.62x51 nato!
hey and even funnier than that... ask yourself how exactly the russians designed a belt fed machine gun half a century ago that, while firing a much
more powerful and generally suitable round, ALSO weighs less than even the more than $25,000 per gun (no that doesn't include optics accessories
foregrips or anything else... JUST THE GUN) to acquire a single M240L!!! (just to put that in perspective ...you can buy several of the extremely
rare and valuable semiautomatc PKM belt feds plus a couple thousand rounds of ammunition enough links and belt boxes to hold every round and a decent
set of accessories INCLUDING optics.... and not get ANYWHERE CLOSE to paying $25,000!!)
Food for thought