04-07-2016, 12:27 PM
[quote=SHORT-N-SASSY]
Note the position in first picture. Forward stance that allows a person to control recoil, easily move forward, up, down, to the sides.
Note position in second picture. Weight is toward the back and will continue to go that way under recoil, and one has to shift the entire body forward to balance before being able to move forward, to the sides, up or down. The design of this carbine almost demands such a position for people with shorter arms. Or it demands one must stretch their arm well forward of what is natural. Not as ergonomic as it appears.
Look at mount for the optic in the second picture. I am positive it would break if it were dropped or were slammed into something.
A issue we had with the very short barrel carbines was not blowing ones finger off when stress shooting. Maybe a bit longer barrel would be of benefit.
Although anyone can learn to conform to the shape of a rifle or carbine, things are much better if the rifle or carbine conforms to the person.
My real statement is more that no matter what the package looks like, unless someone comes up with a quantum improvement in terms of the mechanism of inflicting a wound, all one is doing is taking basically 19th century technology and lethality and putting it in a package that looks different than a rifle or carbine of 100 years ago.
To 300 meters, what may be of more importance than the cartridge being used is the speed and precision in which the rifleman can use his carbine.
It isn't a matter of perspective to me but rather a conclusion brought out from experience with both designs.
Now, if someone wanted to give me one of those carbines in any caliber, I wouldn't turn them down. Just that if my life depended on it, I would stay with what we know as an M-4 .
LR55
Note the position in first picture. Forward stance that allows a person to control recoil, easily move forward, up, down, to the sides.
Note position in second picture. Weight is toward the back and will continue to go that way under recoil, and one has to shift the entire body forward to balance before being able to move forward, to the sides, up or down. The design of this carbine almost demands such a position for people with shorter arms. Or it demands one must stretch their arm well forward of what is natural. Not as ergonomic as it appears.
Look at mount for the optic in the second picture. I am positive it would break if it were dropped or were slammed into something.
A issue we had with the very short barrel carbines was not blowing ones finger off when stress shooting. Maybe a bit longer barrel would be of benefit.
Although anyone can learn to conform to the shape of a rifle or carbine, things are much better if the rifle or carbine conforms to the person.
My real statement is more that no matter what the package looks like, unless someone comes up with a quantum improvement in terms of the mechanism of inflicting a wound, all one is doing is taking basically 19th century technology and lethality and putting it in a package that looks different than a rifle or carbine of 100 years ago.
To 300 meters, what may be of more importance than the cartridge being used is the speed and precision in which the rifleman can use his carbine.
It isn't a matter of perspective to me but rather a conclusion brought out from experience with both designs.
Now, if someone wanted to give me one of those carbines in any caliber, I wouldn't turn them down. Just that if my life depended on it, I would stay with what we know as an M-4 .
LR55