https://www.imfdb.org/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Masterius&feedformat=atomInternet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T09:39:24ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.7https://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=546767User:Masterius2012-04-14T14:49:52Z<p>Masterius: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Evil_Tim&diff=546766User talk:Evil Tim2012-04-14T14:49:19Z<p>Masterius: /* Re: Trolling */</p>
<hr />
<div>''Earlier discussions: [[User Talk:Evil Tim/Archive 1]]''<br />
<br />
== Gun Brand Pages ==<br />
<br />
Yo. So now that at least 2 admins have contributed to the new "Gun Brand Pages" is it safe to say the idea is sticking? I want to keep working on these but I dont want to spend all this time just to have them deleted. I'm still new to this site so whats the procedure for getting this approved by the powers that be? Happy holidays, [[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:06, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Thanks for your help with the [[Heckler & Koch]] page. Any feedback? You like the format? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:46, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Kampfpistole ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for your remarks, they make perfect sense. I did not check my e-mail in the last few minutes so I was totally unaware that somebody else (you) was working on the same page. This way we can keep eachother busy, right? My apologies for driving you crazy! <br />
<br />
Reason that I wanted to rename 'Walther Kampfpistole' to a more generic 'Kampfpistole' is that today I read an about the history of this gun. Originally a flare pistol ("Heeresmodell 1934"), from 1943 onwards it was produced by both Walther and Erma as ‘Kamppistole’ (no further numeric nomination) having a big 'Z' on the side indicating that it had 'Zuege' (German for grooves) so that small explosive charges could be fired more accurately. The article did not indicate an original designing manufacturer so I figured removing ‘Walther’ would be the right thing to do. If you say that Walther is indeed the company where it all started, then I can only agree to keep matters as they are. <br />
<br />
As for the LP-42, I see what you mean. Problem is that ‘Kampfpistole’ is actually a very generic name simply meaning ‘battle pistol’ (just like ‘assault rifle’ may apply to AK-47 and M16 alike). In this case, both guns are correctly referred to as ‘Kampfpistole’ but they are of completely different design. As such, I would suggest to remove the ‘Kampfpistole Z’ image from the LP-42 page, leave matters as they are and not merge, wouldn’t you agree? <br />
<br />
By the way, what do you mean by “please don't edit war, it doesn't help”? I am not aware I have been changing anything else today than the Kampfpistole. Take care, let me know what you think and Merry Christmas, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:36, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Good to see your remarks, be my guest to make changes; I will stay away from the subject for a few days hahaha Not sure of you are aware, but 'Leuchtpistole' is yet another generic nomination. It's German for 'Flare Pistol' so I think it would not be correct to put all 'Leuchtpistols' on one page, not in the least because the designs are very different. Take care, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Spammer==<br />
Since you are one of the most active admins on this site, here is a spammer I consider banning: [[User:Grishacka1929|Grishacka1929]]. Highlighted in blue is his [[Lifetime asks, contends actual...|contribution]]. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 18:52, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==This guys is crazy==<br />
He's a raving asshat. He's another Liam, save for the fact he does know his 1911s. But he's also being a jerk. Okay, so M1911 is the MILITARY designation, the Colt Govt. Model is the company's name for the pistols they sold to the public. M1911 is used by a lot of people as a generic description for that type of pistol. When I say Commercial M1911, I mean a commercial version of the M1911. There is nothing actually erroneous about that description. But think about it. People KNOW the difference between the M1911 and the M1911A1, they know that there were improvements made between the wars. Just calling them the Govt Model doesn't help people to ultimately get to know the difference. Boy, I sure attract a lot of guys who hate on me. This guy needs anger management. Now if we need to update the descriptions, we can. On his conduct, you were right. His rage makes him an unacceptable element on IMFDB. Doesn't matter how much he knows. If he becomes that abusive that quickly, then he is not the personality type that moves IMFDB forward. Thanks for the note. I think I (we as in you're a mod too) need to come up with a code of conduct that warns people to be polite. There are sites out there that are so deathly afraid of offending someone's sensibilities or their freedom of speech, that they are often held hostage by people who promote bad behavior. We welcome corrections when they are done in the right way. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:20, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Se7en==<br />
Sorry, but this page is really kind of ruined when the actor's name is mentioned. It's not really vital on this page to know who the actor was that used the weapon is on this page as much as what character used it. I understand that you disagree with a lot of edits that a particular user makes, but I'll be on the case to let the user know if the edits go overboard. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 04:30, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Kampfpistole Z==<br />
[[Talk:LP-42_Flare_Pistol|Any objections?]] Sounds reasonable. (I hadn't really been following the Kampfpistole saga, I sort of just stumbled into it.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 16:08, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Salt featured article ==<br />
<br />
Can you change the [[Salt]] entry on the featured article template from a SIG SG553 to a P556 SWAT with a SG550 lower please, as it is locked to me. I recently changed it on the Salt page, but featured article just came up and noticed it was now wrong. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:04, 29 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Dead links ==<br />
<br />
Hey man, I've been working on converting a number of pages from the list format over to a wikitable. I've noticed that there are some cases where a movie is listed, but there is no page for that movie. For example, if you look at the [[M1911A1]], about halfway down the Films section [[Nowhere to Run]] (1993) is listed, but there is no page for it. Should it be removed when I convert it to a table? <br />
<br />
(As a side note, I'm not actually editing the M1911 page, that was just the quickest example I could find.) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:52, 4 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Gotcha. That's super helpful! Thanks.--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 23:00, 4 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Cabela's Dangerous Hunts 2009 ==<br />
<br />
Yeah, did some reseach, this game is available in Europe, bt it is under a different name (Same game, different name), it is called "Cabela's Dangerous Adventures". And it is available for the PS2, PS3, Wii, and Xbox 360 (The page is for the Xbox/PS3 version). Don't know if you have an Xbox or a PS3, so that is up to you, and it is dirt cheap by now. - [[User:1morey]] January 15, 2012 12:40 PM (EST)<br />
<br />
== Copyrights ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. I was just updating a page and I noted that the "copyrights" link at the bottom that shows up any time you edit a page is now red. When I clicked on it I noticed that you deleted the page. Just wanted to make sure you were aware that every time you edit a page or a discussion post, a link to that page shows up on the bottom. Any issue with me putting up a redirect on the old Copyright page that takes you to the "General disclaimer" page? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:18, 16 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Copyright page==<br />
There's still time... (Seriously though, is there any legal reason why TOS's and disclaimers have to be a solid block of text? During my newspaper days, we avoided solid blocks of text whenever possible and cringed whenever we saw them in other papers. It's just telling readers "Don't read this.") --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 12:36, 16 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Manufacturer Template ==<br />
<br />
I created a template for the manufacturer pages ([[Manufacturer Template]]). I am going to add a link to it from the <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> page. I would love any input from you and other admins on it. I want to make it as straight forward as possible. Thanks! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:36, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==GLOCK==<br />
GLOCK (in all caps) is the official name of the company as stated on their website. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 06:31, 21 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: NSV ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Thanks for the info. It is strange though, why would KBP have an image of the Kord on their site, which is made by Degtyarev? --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:27, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:I am totally confused now... >< Please delete the pic then, I reupload it with a correct name if and when I will make a page for the Degtyarev compnay. Thanks. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:56, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
no<br />
<br />
==Idontthinksotim==<br />
I don't this is actually directed to you. It's a catchphrase from the American series ''Home Improvement''. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 04:41, 21 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Top Shot - Season 3 ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. I saw your edit on [[Top Shot - Season 3]]. While I get what your saying that revolvers technically are pistols... That distinction isn't made elsewhere on the site. For example, the [[NCIS]] and [[Burn Notice]] pages, some of the most popular on the site, list '''Pistols''' and '''Revolvers'''. It seems like an unnecessary distinction to make... I respect my elders and know you are an admin, I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest or anything but it just seems unnecessary to me, particularly since that isn't the way it is done elsewhere on the site. Thoughts? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:44, 23 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:IMHO, it seems like '''Pistols''' and '''Revolvers''' fall under the overall heading of '''Handguns'''... "When distinguished as a subset of handguns, a pistol is a handgun with a chamber that is integral with the barrel, as opposed to a revolver, wherein the chamber is separate from the barrel as a revolving cylinder." Webster gives a similar definition. I take back what I said previously. Based on a little more research it seems that a "pistol" always refers to a Handgun where the chamber is integrated in the barrel. For example, a [[Derringer]] would be a pistol despite not being semi-auto. Any handgun with a rotating cylinder would be a revolver and they would all fall under the overall category of '''Handguns'''. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:48, 23 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Thats actually really interesting! Never knew you guys defined it differently over there. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:24, 24 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== SOCOM 4 ==<br />
<br />
So I'm in the middle of leaving a message for Commandoninja137 (the guy who created the SOCOM 4 page, if were calling 'that' a page...) warning him that the page was about to be deleted because of his lack of effort. I had JUST added the ''nuke'' tag to the page right before i posted the message on his discussion page. When i posted it with the <nowiki>[[SOCOM 4]]</nowiki> tag, the link came up in red. I'm thinking "huh, I musta mispelled it"... but no. You beat me to the punch and got rid of the page literally seconds after I nuked it. GOOD MANNNN!!! :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:I'm kind of surprised the page lasted as long as it did. I wanted to just delete the stuff copied from Wikipedia, but then the page would be completely empty and would look even worse. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:45, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Yes, I know. I grew suspicious because it was a little too... nice. I cleaned up and consolidated the dead links a few months back, and I don't think there's a single SOCOM game here that could be considered complete. I know they're console only, but still...<br />
<br />
== DVD Screenshots ==<br />
<br />
I mostly have DVD and the Blue-Ray I have is a Blue-Ray/DVD combo pack so I'm set. What I'm wondering though is can you get screencaps from things like Hulu and Netflix? --[[User:Yo dawg 111|Yo dawg 111]] 09:29, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: G36C ==<br />
<br />
It indeed looks similar, although the nomenclature appears to be different. Anyways, I will add it and if someone can find a better match, he will change it. Thanks. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:52, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Masterkey in Homefront ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Please change the Masterkey's gun image on the [[Homefront]] page to this one, as this has a slightly better quality, and it is visible that the rifle is actually a KAC SR-16, not a Colt M4.<br />
[[Image:KAC Masterkey.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Masterkey shotgun mounted on a KAC SR-16 rifle - 12 Gauge]]<br />
Thank you. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:55, 25 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Grenades ==<br />
<br />
DAMITTTTTT. Sorry about that mate. I will be more careful. Frankly I didn't know there was such thing as an Airsoft grenade... Thanks for alerting me to the mistake. :-)<br />
<br />
While I'm writing to ya, I might as well mention the [[AK Gallery]]. I totally get what you are saying about guns like the Dragunov and will 100% defer to your judgment. I felt like it was worth putting them on the page since they look similar but if you don't think they belong, I totally understand. It's all about what will be most useful in identifying the guns. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:23, 27 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Doom Nuke tag ==<br />
I put the nuke tag due to this subsection of the rules.<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#Anime:_Rules_.26_Restrictions<br />
Also the page was previously deleted on the same grounds.<br />
--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 23:42, 30 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The Dark Knight ==<br />
A) Seriously? You've never seen ''[[The Dark Knight]]''? B) Yes, that is a bigger spoiler, I'd tell you more, but I don't want to spoil anything for you, C) Come on, seriously? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 02:11, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Which is the reason why I removed the reference in the page. That particular user who wrote those captions constantly gives away important plot points for no good reason. The user has been warned. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 03:19, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== This is Glock17gen4, why was I blocked? ==<br />
<br />
I have done nothing wrong, and you blocked me and reverted my edits. Here's the reason you left: "(Abusing multiple accounts: Hey there Burt, you're still banned, go away.)" My name isn't Burt, it's Danny. I tryed to use the Glock17gen4 account to contact you about this but it wouldnt allow me to leave a message on your talk page, I would like the block reverted please, as I dont know who this "Burt" is and have done nothing wrong. I really think you have me confused with someone else...PS: do you have email we can discuss this on? [[User:SaferSephiroth|SaferSephiroth]] 20:40, 6 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== What's all this then? ==<br />
<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bunni&redirect=no#I_need_you_or_another_admins_help.2C_my_other_account_was_blocked_wrongfully. Is this the usual suspect? [[User:Bunni|bunni]] 17:19, 7 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== I am not this Burt Reynolds Mustache or Person of Interest guy, please quit blocking me! ==<br />
<br />
Dont you check for IPs before you make such decisions? I am not this character you think I am. Please unblock me! The only reason I changed the gun on the PD page is I was going off of what the GE 007 page said. If that wasn't right then I am sorry, I did not know. I just know all the classic guns in PD are based off Goldeneye 007's guns. I was trying to keep the page accurate, is there anything wrong with that? [[User:RugerLord|RugerLord]] 14:25, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
ET, do whatever you think is best. [[User:Bunni|bunni]] 14:40, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== FlaK ==<br />
<br />
Very sorry. I've heard of what you're talking about, but thought it was abbreviated differently.<br />
<br />
== Read the rest on that bunni guys page ==<br />
<br />
Hey listen, I'm sorry about messing up your page, but seriously dude. You didnt listen to me when I was nice, and I'm sorry about Rockwolf's page too. I have no issue with anyone on this site except you because you keep wrongfully banning me after I helped out. I contacted other admins and the sites owner about this. And you still wouldnt give me a fair chance, so yes, I'm human, I went off on you because I had had enough. I like guns and Goldeneye, I really wanna help with this site, but if I keep being harassed, then how can I do that? PS: I also didnt take to kindly to you and your friend refering to Irish people as "Liams". I'm Irish, and that offends me. [[User:ColdSteel|ColdSteel]] 20:48, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Ok done ==<br />
<br />
It wont allow me to change on the Goldeneye 007 main page but I put the upload on the Walther PP series page and the Goldeneye talk page, it's a genuine .32 ACP PPK the same as Bond uses, and I think you'll like the pic quality alot. [[User:ColdSteel|ColdSteel]] 21:21, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Blocked User ==<br />
The poster was obnoxious and irritating. I just felt like if he comes back he doesn't need to get the change to be an jackass again. Meant to block him earlier, but then I forgot. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 13:59, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Ellipses ==<br />
<br />
You're right, there's no reason to correct them, but is there a reason I shouldn't? Seriously, if there's a reason, I'll stop. --[[User:Cheywoodward2|Cheywoodward2]] 20:32, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Alright, I will stop be such so pedantic about my ellipses. I may forget once or twice. If I end up doing so you my have my apologies. Also, your writing style makes you seem like a very pleasant and knowledgeable person.<br />
<br />
== Re: Trolling ==<br />
<br />
The whole argument of the section didn't have anything to do with improving the page in question. Yet I'm being the target of moderation. How more unfair can it get? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:25, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That would be a fair argument if the 'not-forum' rule was enforced and the only thing one could find on Talk Pages is weapons and accessories identification and nothing else. But that's just not true. And a simple commentary among many others won't suddenly cause IMFDB to collapse. --Masterius 09:37, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I did not want to go into the whole political debate on who's right and who's wrong. Are you sure there were no points that could have gotten a rise out of me? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:45, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
OK, OK, Mr. Wolf was right. You won. So long, and thanks for all the fish. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:49, 14 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Evil_Tim&diff=546765User talk:Evil Tim2012-04-14T14:45:22Z<p>Masterius: /* Re: Trolling */</p>
<hr />
<div>''Earlier discussions: [[User Talk:Evil Tim/Archive 1]]''<br />
<br />
== Gun Brand Pages ==<br />
<br />
Yo. So now that at least 2 admins have contributed to the new "Gun Brand Pages" is it safe to say the idea is sticking? I want to keep working on these but I dont want to spend all this time just to have them deleted. I'm still new to this site so whats the procedure for getting this approved by the powers that be? Happy holidays, [[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:06, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Thanks for your help with the [[Heckler & Koch]] page. Any feedback? You like the format? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:46, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Kampfpistole ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for your remarks, they make perfect sense. I did not check my e-mail in the last few minutes so I was totally unaware that somebody else (you) was working on the same page. This way we can keep eachother busy, right? My apologies for driving you crazy! <br />
<br />
Reason that I wanted to rename 'Walther Kampfpistole' to a more generic 'Kampfpistole' is that today I read an about the history of this gun. Originally a flare pistol ("Heeresmodell 1934"), from 1943 onwards it was produced by both Walther and Erma as ‘Kamppistole’ (no further numeric nomination) having a big 'Z' on the side indicating that it had 'Zuege' (German for grooves) so that small explosive charges could be fired more accurately. The article did not indicate an original designing manufacturer so I figured removing ‘Walther’ would be the right thing to do. If you say that Walther is indeed the company where it all started, then I can only agree to keep matters as they are. <br />
<br />
As for the LP-42, I see what you mean. Problem is that ‘Kampfpistole’ is actually a very generic name simply meaning ‘battle pistol’ (just like ‘assault rifle’ may apply to AK-47 and M16 alike). In this case, both guns are correctly referred to as ‘Kampfpistole’ but they are of completely different design. As such, I would suggest to remove the ‘Kampfpistole Z’ image from the LP-42 page, leave matters as they are and not merge, wouldn’t you agree? <br />
<br />
By the way, what do you mean by “please don't edit war, it doesn't help”? I am not aware I have been changing anything else today than the Kampfpistole. Take care, let me know what you think and Merry Christmas, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:36, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Good to see your remarks, be my guest to make changes; I will stay away from the subject for a few days hahaha Not sure of you are aware, but 'Leuchtpistole' is yet another generic nomination. It's German for 'Flare Pistol' so I think it would not be correct to put all 'Leuchtpistols' on one page, not in the least because the designs are very different. Take care, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Spammer==<br />
Since you are one of the most active admins on this site, here is a spammer I consider banning: [[User:Grishacka1929|Grishacka1929]]. Highlighted in blue is his [[Lifetime asks, contends actual...|contribution]]. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 18:52, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==This guys is crazy==<br />
He's a raving asshat. He's another Liam, save for the fact he does know his 1911s. But he's also being a jerk. Okay, so M1911 is the MILITARY designation, the Colt Govt. Model is the company's name for the pistols they sold to the public. M1911 is used by a lot of people as a generic description for that type of pistol. When I say Commercial M1911, I mean a commercial version of the M1911. There is nothing actually erroneous about that description. But think about it. People KNOW the difference between the M1911 and the M1911A1, they know that there were improvements made between the wars. Just calling them the Govt Model doesn't help people to ultimately get to know the difference. Boy, I sure attract a lot of guys who hate on me. This guy needs anger management. Now if we need to update the descriptions, we can. On his conduct, you were right. His rage makes him an unacceptable element on IMFDB. Doesn't matter how much he knows. If he becomes that abusive that quickly, then he is not the personality type that moves IMFDB forward. Thanks for the note. I think I (we as in you're a mod too) need to come up with a code of conduct that warns people to be polite. There are sites out there that are so deathly afraid of offending someone's sensibilities or their freedom of speech, that they are often held hostage by people who promote bad behavior. We welcome corrections when they are done in the right way. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:20, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Se7en==<br />
Sorry, but this page is really kind of ruined when the actor's name is mentioned. It's not really vital on this page to know who the actor was that used the weapon is on this page as much as what character used it. I understand that you disagree with a lot of edits that a particular user makes, but I'll be on the case to let the user know if the edits go overboard. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 04:30, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Kampfpistole Z==<br />
[[Talk:LP-42_Flare_Pistol|Any objections?]] Sounds reasonable. (I hadn't really been following the Kampfpistole saga, I sort of just stumbled into it.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 16:08, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Salt featured article ==<br />
<br />
Can you change the [[Salt]] entry on the featured article template from a SIG SG553 to a P556 SWAT with a SG550 lower please, as it is locked to me. I recently changed it on the Salt page, but featured article just came up and noticed it was now wrong. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:04, 29 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Dead links ==<br />
<br />
Hey man, I've been working on converting a number of pages from the list format over to a wikitable. I've noticed that there are some cases where a movie is listed, but there is no page for that movie. For example, if you look at the [[M1911A1]], about halfway down the Films section [[Nowhere to Run]] (1993) is listed, but there is no page for it. Should it be removed when I convert it to a table? <br />
<br />
(As a side note, I'm not actually editing the M1911 page, that was just the quickest example I could find.) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:52, 4 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Gotcha. That's super helpful! Thanks.--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 23:00, 4 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Cabela's Dangerous Hunts 2009 ==<br />
<br />
Yeah, did some reseach, this game is available in Europe, bt it is under a different name (Same game, different name), it is called "Cabela's Dangerous Adventures". And it is available for the PS2, PS3, Wii, and Xbox 360 (The page is for the Xbox/PS3 version). Don't know if you have an Xbox or a PS3, so that is up to you, and it is dirt cheap by now. - [[User:1morey]] January 15, 2012 12:40 PM (EST)<br />
<br />
== Copyrights ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. I was just updating a page and I noted that the "copyrights" link at the bottom that shows up any time you edit a page is now red. When I clicked on it I noticed that you deleted the page. Just wanted to make sure you were aware that every time you edit a page or a discussion post, a link to that page shows up on the bottom. Any issue with me putting up a redirect on the old Copyright page that takes you to the "General disclaimer" page? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:18, 16 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Copyright page==<br />
There's still time... (Seriously though, is there any legal reason why TOS's and disclaimers have to be a solid block of text? During my newspaper days, we avoided solid blocks of text whenever possible and cringed whenever we saw them in other papers. It's just telling readers "Don't read this.") --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 12:36, 16 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Manufacturer Template ==<br />
<br />
I created a template for the manufacturer pages ([[Manufacturer Template]]). I am going to add a link to it from the <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> page. I would love any input from you and other admins on it. I want to make it as straight forward as possible. Thanks! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:36, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==GLOCK==<br />
GLOCK (in all caps) is the official name of the company as stated on their website. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 06:31, 21 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: NSV ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Thanks for the info. It is strange though, why would KBP have an image of the Kord on their site, which is made by Degtyarev? --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:27, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:I am totally confused now... >< Please delete the pic then, I reupload it with a correct name if and when I will make a page for the Degtyarev compnay. Thanks. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:56, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
no<br />
<br />
==Idontthinksotim==<br />
I don't this is actually directed to you. It's a catchphrase from the American series ''Home Improvement''. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 04:41, 21 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Top Shot - Season 3 ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. I saw your edit on [[Top Shot - Season 3]]. While I get what your saying that revolvers technically are pistols... That distinction isn't made elsewhere on the site. For example, the [[NCIS]] and [[Burn Notice]] pages, some of the most popular on the site, list '''Pistols''' and '''Revolvers'''. It seems like an unnecessary distinction to make... I respect my elders and know you are an admin, I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest or anything but it just seems unnecessary to me, particularly since that isn't the way it is done elsewhere on the site. Thoughts? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:44, 23 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:IMHO, it seems like '''Pistols''' and '''Revolvers''' fall under the overall heading of '''Handguns'''... "When distinguished as a subset of handguns, a pistol is a handgun with a chamber that is integral with the barrel, as opposed to a revolver, wherein the chamber is separate from the barrel as a revolving cylinder." Webster gives a similar definition. I take back what I said previously. Based on a little more research it seems that a "pistol" always refers to a Handgun where the chamber is integrated in the barrel. For example, a [[Derringer]] would be a pistol despite not being semi-auto. Any handgun with a rotating cylinder would be a revolver and they would all fall under the overall category of '''Handguns'''. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:48, 23 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Thats actually really interesting! Never knew you guys defined it differently over there. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:24, 24 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== SOCOM 4 ==<br />
<br />
So I'm in the middle of leaving a message for Commandoninja137 (the guy who created the SOCOM 4 page, if were calling 'that' a page...) warning him that the page was about to be deleted because of his lack of effort. I had JUST added the ''nuke'' tag to the page right before i posted the message on his discussion page. When i posted it with the <nowiki>[[SOCOM 4]]</nowiki> tag, the link came up in red. I'm thinking "huh, I musta mispelled it"... but no. You beat me to the punch and got rid of the page literally seconds after I nuked it. GOOD MANNNN!!! :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:I'm kind of surprised the page lasted as long as it did. I wanted to just delete the stuff copied from Wikipedia, but then the page would be completely empty and would look even worse. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:45, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Yes, I know. I grew suspicious because it was a little too... nice. I cleaned up and consolidated the dead links a few months back, and I don't think there's a single SOCOM game here that could be considered complete. I know they're console only, but still...<br />
<br />
== DVD Screenshots ==<br />
<br />
I mostly have DVD and the Blue-Ray I have is a Blue-Ray/DVD combo pack so I'm set. What I'm wondering though is can you get screencaps from things like Hulu and Netflix? --[[User:Yo dawg 111|Yo dawg 111]] 09:29, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: G36C ==<br />
<br />
It indeed looks similar, although the nomenclature appears to be different. Anyways, I will add it and if someone can find a better match, he will change it. Thanks. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:52, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Masterkey in Homefront ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Please change the Masterkey's gun image on the [[Homefront]] page to this one, as this has a slightly better quality, and it is visible that the rifle is actually a KAC SR-16, not a Colt M4.<br />
[[Image:KAC Masterkey.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Masterkey shotgun mounted on a KAC SR-16 rifle - 12 Gauge]]<br />
Thank you. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:55, 25 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Grenades ==<br />
<br />
DAMITTTTTT. Sorry about that mate. I will be more careful. Frankly I didn't know there was such thing as an Airsoft grenade... Thanks for alerting me to the mistake. :-)<br />
<br />
While I'm writing to ya, I might as well mention the [[AK Gallery]]. I totally get what you are saying about guns like the Dragunov and will 100% defer to your judgment. I felt like it was worth putting them on the page since they look similar but if you don't think they belong, I totally understand. It's all about what will be most useful in identifying the guns. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:23, 27 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Doom Nuke tag ==<br />
I put the nuke tag due to this subsection of the rules.<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#Anime:_Rules_.26_Restrictions<br />
Also the page was previously deleted on the same grounds.<br />
--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 23:42, 30 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The Dark Knight ==<br />
A) Seriously? You've never seen ''[[The Dark Knight]]''? B) Yes, that is a bigger spoiler, I'd tell you more, but I don't want to spoil anything for you, C) Come on, seriously? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 02:11, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Which is the reason why I removed the reference in the page. That particular user who wrote those captions constantly gives away important plot points for no good reason. The user has been warned. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 03:19, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== This is Glock17gen4, why was I blocked? ==<br />
<br />
I have done nothing wrong, and you blocked me and reverted my edits. Here's the reason you left: "(Abusing multiple accounts: Hey there Burt, you're still banned, go away.)" My name isn't Burt, it's Danny. I tryed to use the Glock17gen4 account to contact you about this but it wouldnt allow me to leave a message on your talk page, I would like the block reverted please, as I dont know who this "Burt" is and have done nothing wrong. I really think you have me confused with someone else...PS: do you have email we can discuss this on? [[User:SaferSephiroth|SaferSephiroth]] 20:40, 6 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== What's all this then? ==<br />
<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bunni&redirect=no#I_need_you_or_another_admins_help.2C_my_other_account_was_blocked_wrongfully. Is this the usual suspect? [[User:Bunni|bunni]] 17:19, 7 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== I am not this Burt Reynolds Mustache or Person of Interest guy, please quit blocking me! ==<br />
<br />
Dont you check for IPs before you make such decisions? I am not this character you think I am. Please unblock me! The only reason I changed the gun on the PD page is I was going off of what the GE 007 page said. If that wasn't right then I am sorry, I did not know. I just know all the classic guns in PD are based off Goldeneye 007's guns. I was trying to keep the page accurate, is there anything wrong with that? [[User:RugerLord|RugerLord]] 14:25, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
ET, do whatever you think is best. [[User:Bunni|bunni]] 14:40, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== FlaK ==<br />
<br />
Very sorry. I've heard of what you're talking about, but thought it was abbreviated differently.<br />
<br />
== Read the rest on that bunni guys page ==<br />
<br />
Hey listen, I'm sorry about messing up your page, but seriously dude. You didnt listen to me when I was nice, and I'm sorry about Rockwolf's page too. I have no issue with anyone on this site except you because you keep wrongfully banning me after I helped out. I contacted other admins and the sites owner about this. And you still wouldnt give me a fair chance, so yes, I'm human, I went off on you because I had had enough. I like guns and Goldeneye, I really wanna help with this site, but if I keep being harassed, then how can I do that? PS: I also didnt take to kindly to you and your friend refering to Irish people as "Liams". I'm Irish, and that offends me. [[User:ColdSteel|ColdSteel]] 20:48, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Ok done ==<br />
<br />
It wont allow me to change on the Goldeneye 007 main page but I put the upload on the Walther PP series page and the Goldeneye talk page, it's a genuine .32 ACP PPK the same as Bond uses, and I think you'll like the pic quality alot. [[User:ColdSteel|ColdSteel]] 21:21, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Blocked User ==<br />
The poster was obnoxious and irritating. I just felt like if he comes back he doesn't need to get the change to be an jackass again. Meant to block him earlier, but then I forgot. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 13:59, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Ellipses ==<br />
<br />
You're right, there's no reason to correct them, but is there a reason I shouldn't? Seriously, if there's a reason, I'll stop. --[[User:Cheywoodward2|Cheywoodward2]] 20:32, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Alright, I will stop be such so pedantic about my ellipses. I may forget once or twice. If I end up doing so you my have my apologies. Also, your writing style makes you seem like a very pleasant and knowledgeable person.<br />
<br />
== Re: Trolling ==<br />
<br />
The whole argument of the section didn't have anything to do with improving the page in question. Yet I'm being the target of moderation. How more unfair can it get? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:25, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That would be a fair argument if the 'not-forum' rule was enforced and the only thing one could find on Talk Pages is weapons and accessories identification and nothing else. But that's just not true. And a simple commentary among many others won't suddenly cause IMFDB to collapse. --Masterius 09:37, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I did not want to go into the whole political debate on who's right and who's wrong. Are you sure there were no points that could have gotten a rise out of me? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:45, 14 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User_talk:MoviePropMaster2008_(Archive)&diff=546759User talk:MoviePropMaster2008 (Archive)2012-04-14T14:37:30Z<p>Masterius: /* About admin Evil Tim */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Timecop Automatic Machine Pistol ==<br />
<br />
Just wondering if you had any idea what firearm the Timecop Machine Pistol was built around. I've been told that it's not a TEC 9, AP-9 or Spectre M4. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 20:47, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
[[Image:TimeCop-AutoGunS00a.jpg|thumb|none|501px|]]<br />
[[Image:TIMECOP-AutoPistol01a.jpg|thumb|none|501px|]]<br />
[[Image:TimeCop-Autoguns02a.jpg|thumb|none|501px|]]<br />
[[File:RITB 15.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[File:RITB 32.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
== Finctional Weapons ==<br />
<br />
YOU BLANKED THE PAGE! WAHOOOO! Now it will load! :-) SO quick question for ya. What are the rules governing whether a fictional weapon gets its own page? I read the info on [[IMFDB Info: Fictional Firearms]] and it makes perfect sense, but it seems more about whether the gun is mentioned on the site or not. I'm particularly curious about the [[(America's Army 3) - Grenade Series]]. These grenades are used in 1 video game and are clearly based on real world grenades. It seems to me that they don't need to have their own page if they are just used in this one game. I'd love to hear your thoughts. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:42, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== SVD ==<br />
<br />
I fixed the SVD page a while back; someone had changed the caption on your image of the Tiger Carbine you own to claim it was an SVD-M a couple of years back. What I'm curious about is the one we have labelled as SVD-S at present; is that one a Tiger Carbine too (as it was orginally captioned)? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:21, 3 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Don't know. That one was a google search image and I'm not an expert on SVD rifles. Sure, I own them, but I have not researched them. IMFDB requires a magnitude higher of scholastic research than my job actually requires. hahahahahahah. I just know the rudimentary background on most guns, and then take them to the movie set, etc. etc. etc. :) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 12:39, 3 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== I need you or another admins help, my other account was blocked wrongfully. ==<br />
<br />
Hello, I was wondering if you could help me with an issue I am having. Admin "Evil Tim" blocked me for no reason thinking I was some guy named "Burt", which I am not, my name is Danny. I tryed to contact him about it on my blocked account "Glock17gen4", but it wouldnt let me so I'm forced to use this account I made. I tryed to contact him and I have no received a reply, I think he is ignoring the msg or something. I was wondering if you could help and unblock my other account, thanks. [[User:SaferSephiroth|SaferSephiroth]] 16:24, 7 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== People stealing your images ==<br />
<br />
Hey, I'm not much of a poster here, but i found this site through google images, [http://www.majkasvihoruzja.com/ Obvious grand theft imagery]<br />
Just wasn't sure if you were aware of this instance, i've seen photos uploaded in small bits here and there, but this takes it to a new level. [[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 17:25, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About admin Evil Tim ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I posted on [[Talk:1968 Tunnel Rats]] page but [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] reverted my post just a few minutes later. This is not the first time he had conflict with users, his actions forced another old-time user [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] to quit. He likes declaring people trolls without a firm reason. Can something be done about it? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:16, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Unhelpful political commentary which has nothing to do with improving a page does not belong. Unless you can explain why saying America "trembles before China" has anything to do with improving the page "1968 Tunnel Rats" or serves any purpose but annoying people, I'll say it's trolling and doesn't belong. In general treating talk pages as a general discussion forum does not belong since we have an actual forum for that.<br />
<br />
:Mr. Wolf quit because he couldn't accept that a formatting idea only he subscribed to made pages look random and messy. I was sad to see he couldn't get past that weird quirk, since he was a good contributor, and I was sad to see him go. Don't you ''dare'' try to invoke him to justify what you're doing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 09:26, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::That would be a fair argument if the 'not-forum' rule was enforced and the only thing one could find on Talk Pages is weapons and accessories identification and nothing else. But that's just not true. And a simple commentary among many others won't suddenly cause IMFDB to collapse. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:37, 14 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Evil_Tim&diff=546754User talk:Evil Tim2012-04-14T14:25:31Z<p>Masterius: /* Re: Trolling */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>''Earlier discussions: [[User Talk:Evil Tim/Archive 1]]''<br />
<br />
== Gun Brand Pages ==<br />
<br />
Yo. So now that at least 2 admins have contributed to the new "Gun Brand Pages" is it safe to say the idea is sticking? I want to keep working on these but I dont want to spend all this time just to have them deleted. I'm still new to this site so whats the procedure for getting this approved by the powers that be? Happy holidays, [[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 08:06, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Thanks for your help with the [[Heckler & Koch]] page. Any feedback? You like the format? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 14:46, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Kampfpistole ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for your remarks, they make perfect sense. I did not check my e-mail in the last few minutes so I was totally unaware that somebody else (you) was working on the same page. This way we can keep eachother busy, right? My apologies for driving you crazy! <br />
<br />
Reason that I wanted to rename 'Walther Kampfpistole' to a more generic 'Kampfpistole' is that today I read an about the history of this gun. Originally a flare pistol ("Heeresmodell 1934"), from 1943 onwards it was produced by both Walther and Erma as ‘Kamppistole’ (no further numeric nomination) having a big 'Z' on the side indicating that it had 'Zuege' (German for grooves) so that small explosive charges could be fired more accurately. The article did not indicate an original designing manufacturer so I figured removing ‘Walther’ would be the right thing to do. If you say that Walther is indeed the company where it all started, then I can only agree to keep matters as they are. <br />
<br />
As for the LP-42, I see what you mean. Problem is that ‘Kampfpistole’ is actually a very generic name simply meaning ‘battle pistol’ (just like ‘assault rifle’ may apply to AK-47 and M16 alike). In this case, both guns are correctly referred to as ‘Kampfpistole’ but they are of completely different design. As such, I would suggest to remove the ‘Kampfpistole Z’ image from the LP-42 page, leave matters as they are and not merge, wouldn’t you agree? <br />
<br />
By the way, what do you mean by “please don't edit war, it doesn't help”? I am not aware I have been changing anything else today than the Kampfpistole. Take care, let me know what you think and Merry Christmas, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:36, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Good to see your remarks, be my guest to make changes; I will stay away from the subject for a few days hahaha Not sure of you are aware, but 'Leuchtpistole' is yet another generic nomination. It's German for 'Flare Pistol' so I think it would not be correct to put all 'Leuchtpistols' on one page, not in the least because the designs are very different. Take care, --[[User:PeeWee055|PeeWee055]] 10:58, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Spammer==<br />
Since you are one of the most active admins on this site, here is a spammer I consider banning: [[User:Grishacka1929|Grishacka1929]]. Highlighted in blue is his [[Lifetime asks, contends actual...|contribution]]. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 18:52, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==This guys is crazy==<br />
He's a raving asshat. He's another Liam, save for the fact he does know his 1911s. But he's also being a jerk. Okay, so M1911 is the MILITARY designation, the Colt Govt. Model is the company's name for the pistols they sold to the public. M1911 is used by a lot of people as a generic description for that type of pistol. When I say Commercial M1911, I mean a commercial version of the M1911. There is nothing actually erroneous about that description. But think about it. People KNOW the difference between the M1911 and the M1911A1, they know that there were improvements made between the wars. Just calling them the Govt Model doesn't help people to ultimately get to know the difference. Boy, I sure attract a lot of guys who hate on me. This guy needs anger management. Now if we need to update the descriptions, we can. On his conduct, you were right. His rage makes him an unacceptable element on IMFDB. Doesn't matter how much he knows. If he becomes that abusive that quickly, then he is not the personality type that moves IMFDB forward. Thanks for the note. I think I (we as in you're a mod too) need to come up with a code of conduct that warns people to be polite. There are sites out there that are so deathly afraid of offending someone's sensibilities or their freedom of speech, that they are often held hostage by people who promote bad behavior. We welcome corrections when they are done in the right way. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:20, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Se7en==<br />
Sorry, but this page is really kind of ruined when the actor's name is mentioned. It's not really vital on this page to know who the actor was that used the weapon is on this page as much as what character used it. I understand that you disagree with a lot of edits that a particular user makes, but I'll be on the case to let the user know if the edits go overboard. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 04:30, 25 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Kampfpistole Z==<br />
[[Talk:LP-42_Flare_Pistol|Any objections?]] Sounds reasonable. (I hadn't really been following the Kampfpistole saga, I sort of just stumbled into it.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 16:08, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Salt featured article ==<br />
<br />
Can you change the [[Salt]] entry on the featured article template from a SIG SG553 to a P556 SWAT with a SG550 lower please, as it is locked to me. I recently changed it on the Salt page, but featured article just came up and noticed it was now wrong. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:04, 29 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Dead links ==<br />
<br />
Hey man, I've been working on converting a number of pages from the list format over to a wikitable. I've noticed that there are some cases where a movie is listed, but there is no page for that movie. For example, if you look at the [[M1911A1]], about halfway down the Films section [[Nowhere to Run]] (1993) is listed, but there is no page for it. Should it be removed when I convert it to a table? <br />
<br />
(As a side note, I'm not actually editing the M1911 page, that was just the quickest example I could find.) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:52, 4 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Gotcha. That's super helpful! Thanks.--[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 23:00, 4 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Cabela's Dangerous Hunts 2009 ==<br />
<br />
Yeah, did some reseach, this game is available in Europe, bt it is under a different name (Same game, different name), it is called "Cabela's Dangerous Adventures". And it is available for the PS2, PS3, Wii, and Xbox 360 (The page is for the Xbox/PS3 version). Don't know if you have an Xbox or a PS3, so that is up to you, and it is dirt cheap by now. - [[User:1morey]] January 15, 2012 12:40 PM (EST)<br />
<br />
== Copyrights ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. I was just updating a page and I noted that the "copyrights" link at the bottom that shows up any time you edit a page is now red. When I clicked on it I noticed that you deleted the page. Just wanted to make sure you were aware that every time you edit a page or a discussion post, a link to that page shows up on the bottom. Any issue with me putting up a redirect on the old Copyright page that takes you to the "General disclaimer" page? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:18, 16 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Copyright page==<br />
There's still time... (Seriously though, is there any legal reason why TOS's and disclaimers have to be a solid block of text? During my newspaper days, we avoided solid blocks of text whenever possible and cringed whenever we saw them in other papers. It's just telling readers "Don't read this.") --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 12:36, 16 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Manufacturer Template ==<br />
<br />
I created a template for the manufacturer pages ([[Manufacturer Template]]). I am going to add a link to it from the <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> page. I would love any input from you and other admins on it. I want to make it as straight forward as possible. Thanks! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 13:36, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==GLOCK==<br />
GLOCK (in all caps) is the official name of the company as stated on their website. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 06:31, 21 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: NSV ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Thanks for the info. It is strange though, why would KBP have an image of the Kord on their site, which is made by Degtyarev? --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:27, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:I am totally confused now... >< Please delete the pic then, I reupload it with a correct name if and when I will make a page for the Degtyarev compnay. Thanks. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:56, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
no<br />
<br />
==Idontthinksotim==<br />
I don't this is actually directed to you. It's a catchphrase from the American series ''Home Improvement''. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 04:41, 21 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Top Shot - Season 3 ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. I saw your edit on [[Top Shot - Season 3]]. While I get what your saying that revolvers technically are pistols... That distinction isn't made elsewhere on the site. For example, the [[NCIS]] and [[Burn Notice]] pages, some of the most popular on the site, list '''Pistols''' and '''Revolvers'''. It seems like an unnecessary distinction to make... I respect my elders and know you are an admin, I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest or anything but it just seems unnecessary to me, particularly since that isn't the way it is done elsewhere on the site. Thoughts? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:44, 23 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:IMHO, it seems like '''Pistols''' and '''Revolvers''' fall under the overall heading of '''Handguns'''... "When distinguished as a subset of handguns, a pistol is a handgun with a chamber that is integral with the barrel, as opposed to a revolver, wherein the chamber is separate from the barrel as a revolving cylinder." Webster gives a similar definition. I take back what I said previously. Based on a little more research it seems that a "pistol" always refers to a Handgun where the chamber is integrated in the barrel. For example, a [[Derringer]] would be a pistol despite not being semi-auto. Any handgun with a rotating cylinder would be a revolver and they would all fall under the overall category of '''Handguns'''. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 16:48, 23 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Thats actually really interesting! Never knew you guys defined it differently over there. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:24, 24 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== SOCOM 4 ==<br />
<br />
So I'm in the middle of leaving a message for Commandoninja137 (the guy who created the SOCOM 4 page, if were calling 'that' a page...) warning him that the page was about to be deleted because of his lack of effort. I had JUST added the ''nuke'' tag to the page right before i posted the message on his discussion page. When i posted it with the <nowiki>[[SOCOM 4]]</nowiki> tag, the link came up in red. I'm thinking "huh, I musta mispelled it"... but no. You beat me to the punch and got rid of the page literally seconds after I nuked it. GOOD MANNNN!!! :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:I'm kind of surprised the page lasted as long as it did. I wanted to just delete the stuff copied from Wikipedia, but then the page would be completely empty and would look even worse. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 15:45, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Yes, I know. I grew suspicious because it was a little too... nice. I cleaned up and consolidated the dead links a few months back, and I don't think there's a single SOCOM game here that could be considered complete. I know they're console only, but still...<br />
<br />
== DVD Screenshots ==<br />
<br />
I mostly have DVD and the Blue-Ray I have is a Blue-Ray/DVD combo pack so I'm set. What I'm wondering though is can you get screencaps from things like Hulu and Netflix? --[[User:Yo dawg 111|Yo dawg 111]] 09:29, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: G36C ==<br />
<br />
It indeed looks similar, although the nomenclature appears to be different. Anyways, I will add it and if someone can find a better match, he will change it. Thanks. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:52, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Masterkey in Homefront ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Please change the Masterkey's gun image on the [[Homefront]] page to this one, as this has a slightly better quality, and it is visible that the rifle is actually a KAC SR-16, not a Colt M4.<br />
[[Image:KAC Masterkey.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Masterkey shotgun mounted on a KAC SR-16 rifle - 12 Gauge]]<br />
Thank you. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:55, 25 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Grenades ==<br />
<br />
DAMITTTTTT. Sorry about that mate. I will be more careful. Frankly I didn't know there was such thing as an Airsoft grenade... Thanks for alerting me to the mistake. :-)<br />
<br />
While I'm writing to ya, I might as well mention the [[AK Gallery]]. I totally get what you are saying about guns like the Dragunov and will 100% defer to your judgment. I felt like it was worth putting them on the page since they look similar but if you don't think they belong, I totally understand. It's all about what will be most useful in identifying the guns. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:23, 27 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Doom Nuke tag ==<br />
I put the nuke tag due to this subsection of the rules.<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#Anime:_Rules_.26_Restrictions<br />
Also the page was previously deleted on the same grounds.<br />
--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 23:42, 30 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The Dark Knight ==<br />
A) Seriously? You've never seen ''[[The Dark Knight]]''? B) Yes, that is a bigger spoiler, I'd tell you more, but I don't want to spoil anything for you, C) Come on, seriously? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 02:11, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Which is the reason why I removed the reference in the page. That particular user who wrote those captions constantly gives away important plot points for no good reason. The user has been warned. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 03:19, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== This is Glock17gen4, why was I blocked? ==<br />
<br />
I have done nothing wrong, and you blocked me and reverted my edits. Here's the reason you left: "(Abusing multiple accounts: Hey there Burt, you're still banned, go away.)" My name isn't Burt, it's Danny. I tryed to use the Glock17gen4 account to contact you about this but it wouldnt allow me to leave a message on your talk page, I would like the block reverted please, as I dont know who this "Burt" is and have done nothing wrong. I really think you have me confused with someone else...PS: do you have email we can discuss this on? [[User:SaferSephiroth|SaferSephiroth]] 20:40, 6 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== What's all this then? ==<br />
<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bunni&redirect=no#I_need_you_or_another_admins_help.2C_my_other_account_was_blocked_wrongfully. Is this the usual suspect? [[User:Bunni|bunni]] 17:19, 7 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== I am not this Burt Reynolds Mustache or Person of Interest guy, please quit blocking me! ==<br />
<br />
Dont you check for IPs before you make such decisions? I am not this character you think I am. Please unblock me! The only reason I changed the gun on the PD page is I was going off of what the GE 007 page said. If that wasn't right then I am sorry, I did not know. I just know all the classic guns in PD are based off Goldeneye 007's guns. I was trying to keep the page accurate, is there anything wrong with that? [[User:RugerLord|RugerLord]] 14:25, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
ET, do whatever you think is best. [[User:Bunni|bunni]] 14:40, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== FlaK ==<br />
<br />
Very sorry. I've heard of what you're talking about, but thought it was abbreviated differently.<br />
<br />
== Read the rest on that bunni guys page ==<br />
<br />
Hey listen, I'm sorry about messing up your page, but seriously dude. You didnt listen to me when I was nice, and I'm sorry about Rockwolf's page too. I have no issue with anyone on this site except you because you keep wrongfully banning me after I helped out. I contacted other admins and the sites owner about this. And you still wouldnt give me a fair chance, so yes, I'm human, I went off on you because I had had enough. I like guns and Goldeneye, I really wanna help with this site, but if I keep being harassed, then how can I do that? PS: I also didnt take to kindly to you and your friend refering to Irish people as "Liams". I'm Irish, and that offends me. [[User:ColdSteel|ColdSteel]] 20:48, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Ok done ==<br />
<br />
It wont allow me to change on the Goldeneye 007 main page but I put the upload on the Walther PP series page and the Goldeneye talk page, it's a genuine .32 ACP PPK the same as Bond uses, and I think you'll like the pic quality alot. [[User:ColdSteel|ColdSteel]] 21:21, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Blocked User ==<br />
The poster was obnoxious and irritating. I just felt like if he comes back he doesn't need to get the change to be an jackass again. Meant to block him earlier, but then I forgot. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 13:59, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Ellipses ==<br />
<br />
You're right, there's no reason to correct them, but is there a reason I shouldn't? Seriously, if there's a reason, I'll stop. --[[User:Cheywoodward2|Cheywoodward2]] 20:32, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Alright, I will stop be such so pedantic about my ellipses. I may forget once or twice. If I end up doing so you my have my apologies. Also, your writing style makes you seem like a very pleasant and knowledgeable person.<br />
<br />
== Re: Trolling ==<br />
<br />
The whole argument of the section didn't have anything to do with improving the page in question. Yet I'm being the target of moderation. How more unfair can it get? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:25, 14 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User_talk:MoviePropMaster2008_(Archive)&diff=546752User talk:MoviePropMaster2008 (Archive)2012-04-14T14:16:56Z<p>Masterius: /* About admin Evil Tim */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>== Timecop Automatic Machine Pistol ==<br />
<br />
Just wondering if you had any idea what firearm the Timecop Machine Pistol was built around. I've been told that it's not a TEC 9, AP-9 or Spectre M4. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 20:47, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
[[Image:TimeCop-AutoGunS00a.jpg|thumb|none|501px|]]<br />
[[Image:TIMECOP-AutoPistol01a.jpg|thumb|none|501px|]]<br />
[[Image:TimeCop-Autoguns02a.jpg|thumb|none|501px|]]<br />
[[File:RITB 15.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[File:RITB 32.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
== Finctional Weapons ==<br />
<br />
YOU BLANKED THE PAGE! WAHOOOO! Now it will load! :-) SO quick question for ya. What are the rules governing whether a fictional weapon gets its own page? I read the info on [[IMFDB Info: Fictional Firearms]] and it makes perfect sense, but it seems more about whether the gun is mentioned on the site or not. I'm particularly curious about the [[(America's Army 3) - Grenade Series]]. These grenades are used in 1 video game and are clearly based on real world grenades. It seems to me that they don't need to have their own page if they are just used in this one game. I'd love to hear your thoughts. :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:42, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== SVD ==<br />
<br />
I fixed the SVD page a while back; someone had changed the caption on your image of the Tiger Carbine you own to claim it was an SVD-M a couple of years back. What I'm curious about is the one we have labelled as SVD-S at present; is that one a Tiger Carbine too (as it was orginally captioned)? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:21, 3 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Don't know. That one was a google search image and I'm not an expert on SVD rifles. Sure, I own them, but I have not researched them. IMFDB requires a magnitude higher of scholastic research than my job actually requires. hahahahahahah. I just know the rudimentary background on most guns, and then take them to the movie set, etc. etc. etc. :) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 12:39, 3 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== I need you or another admins help, my other account was blocked wrongfully. ==<br />
<br />
Hello, I was wondering if you could help me with an issue I am having. Admin "Evil Tim" blocked me for no reason thinking I was some guy named "Burt", which I am not, my name is Danny. I tryed to contact him about it on my blocked account "Glock17gen4", but it wouldnt let me so I'm forced to use this account I made. I tryed to contact him and I have no received a reply, I think he is ignoring the msg or something. I was wondering if you could help and unblock my other account, thanks. [[User:SaferSephiroth|SaferSephiroth]] 16:24, 7 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== People stealing your images ==<br />
<br />
Hey, I'm not much of a poster here, but i found this site through google images, [http://www.majkasvihoruzja.com/ Obvious grand theft imagery]<br />
Just wasn't sure if you were aware of this instance, i've seen photos uploaded in small bits here and there, but this takes it to a new level. [[User:Pepper|Pepper]] 17:25, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About admin Evil Tim ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I posted on [[Talk:1968 Tunnel Rats]] page but [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] reverted my post just a few minutes later. This is not the first time he had conflict with users, his actions forced another old-time user [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] to quit. He likes declaring people trolls without a firm reason. Can something be done about it? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:16, 14 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:1968_Tunnel_Rats&diff=546748Talk:1968 Tunnel Rats2012-04-14T14:02:03Z<p>Masterius: /* Boring as hell */</p>
<hr />
<div>==M16 Three prong flash hiders==<br />
[[Image:TR-ArmiJagerM1622.jpg|thumb|none|400px|check out this rifle, isn't it an AP74?]]<br />
Anyone else notice that these three pronged flash hiders look weird? They sweep down at TOO sharp of an angle. That is why I thought they were [[M16 rifle series#.22 caliber Clones of the M16 Rifle|Adler-Jager AP-74 rifles]] previously. Or possibly the South African Armorers just took the flash hiders off of the AP-74 rifles and retapped them to mount on the M16 Rifles. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Lame uniforms and gear==<br />
What makes me ticked off, is that I could have outfitted this entire movie ACCURATELY with what I have in my closet! Arghhhhh. I am also a collector of Vietnam era militaria (US and Enemy forces). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
well, if you ever work on a uwe boll film you can abuse him after your done....for the rest of us as well [[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 11:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Boring as hell ==<br />
That is probably the only thing I can say about this movie. Just... What was the story? Was there one? I couldn't guess it, I saw it 3 times! -protoAuthor<br />
:That's the bad thing about Vietnam War movies. We still didn't have a Band of Brothers or Saving Private Ryan of the Vietnam War. We really need it. None of that Platoon, Casualties of War Anti-war bullshit. I want one like Band of Brothers were they just show US Grunts living through out 1968 in the middle of the Vietnam War without any political shit. Just show me a accurate depiction of the US Involvement of the Vietnam War, Dammit!-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
::Hamburger Hill and We Were Soldiers are good. They're anti-war, but they show soldiers who are brave, tough, dedicated to the job and to each other. If you haven't already, watch them.-[[User:Crackshot|Crackshot]] 20:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)<br />
:::I have seen the above movies, but I haven't seen Hamburger Hill in nearly 20 years. The closest you will get to ''Band Of Brothers'' or ''The Pacific'' in Vietnam would be the TV series ''Tour Of Duty''. The only really notable politics on the war was an episode where some of the unit went to Hawaii on R&R and they were abused by the citizens. An interesting perspective from a taxi driver who drove the men around, who was of Japanese descent and was interned in WW2, forces them to wonder what they are fighting for. ''Wraith''<br />
:::Am I the only person on this site who ''doesn't'' believe that being pro-war and pro-military are the same thing? A film doesn't have to endorse war as something that's "cool" in order to reflect military personnel in a positive light. The above mentioned ''We Were Soldiers'' is a prime example of this. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:49, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::''We Were Soldiers'' is shameless, filling the screen with square-jawed officers who weep at carnage and fresh-faced GIs who use their last breaths to intone things like, "I'm glad I died for my country." --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:56, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::::''(regarding the critique of WE were Soldiers)'' Not a challenge here, but How old are you Masterius? Have you served in uniform? Are you an American? Since none of this information can be gleaned from your user page, I was just curious. People with different ages & backgrounds have different reactions to things in films. Not saying your post was wrong, but I think you missed the point of the Lt. saying "I'm glad I died for my country" since it was HIS mistake that led to his demise (leading his men into an ill conceived chase of a single lookout into an ambush). It showed that he was loyal and had good motivations, but he wasn't that good of an officer (something hinted at earlier in the film during training). Thus his final words were sad irony. Regarding similar cinema, I usually find myself arguing with young, hip, Europeans on other movie boards about these elements in American cinema, primarily because they do not interpret such scenes the same as someone with my background would. I do agree that director Randall Wallace is really schmaltzy and really goes over the top in sappy sentimentalism. He would have really been better served if he had dialed it back a bit. At any rate, I usually understand different perceptions about films (especially so called patriotic films) if I know the background of the viewer. Even people who share the North American continent and English language, like Canadians, don't have that deep understanding of why Americans react the way they do (generally speaking) :) best regards [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 14:22, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Haven't served myself (although have basic military training from local military base) but I heard stories from Afghan war veterans. These are kind of wars that are pointless and unneeded. Governments pursuing their shady political agenda, throwing young men into the meat grinder far away from their homes. Are they fighting for their country? What did Vietnam have to do with USA, like what did Afghanistan have to do with Soviet Union? Was there any threat, like with Nazism in WW2? The answer would be 'No'. And then those who survived returned home, tried to forget their experience but couldn't because of posttraumatic stress disorder. Being patriotic is not bad at all, but there are cases where patriotism overdose is out of place, as even Americans themselves protested Vietnam War and called for it to end. My two cents. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:27, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::::P.S. Not American, in '''My Location''' is my Nationality.<br />
:::::::First of all, may I say Hello My Kazakhstani friend, and may I also say .... "NICE...." :) Well, your confusion is common amongst non Americans (and some Americans but most Americans understand the mentality). They have hard times understanding how Americans view our military and patriotism in general. I find that most Europeans find "patriotism" an alien mindset. The only people whom I actually saw openly acting patriotic were the UK (and other former Commonwealth countries). Perhaps it is an offshoot of being a former British Colony. ;) Anyway, South Vietnam was an ALLY of the U.S. in the Cold War. Sure they were a corrupt regime, but we were protecting a country that was recognized as a sovereign nation by the U.N. from attacks from North Vietnam and their proxies (the VC). the point of the Vietnam Conflict was to stop the 'domino' effect of communism sweeping Asia. Recently historians have reassessed the Vietnam conflict and though it was a tragic conflict with much loss of life, it DID give all the surrounding SE Asian countries time to create their own governments, free of influence from the Kremlin. America pretty much beat communism by facing up to it whereever it popped up and (the most important part) outspent the opposition. The Russo-Afghan war WAS different in that other than propping up a puppet regime friendly to the Kremlin, no one was ever sure why the Soviets committed to that war. Perhaps they really wanted more military bases to counter the TONS of American ones in the region, but ultimately that's a big 'so what'? And I am digressing here so I will go back to what I was doing, i.e. prepping for work. :) Thanks for the contribution. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 00:25, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For a country that was fighting Communism, America now ironically [[Red Dawn (2012)|trembles before China]]. And not ''[[Red Dawn|that way]]'' ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:02, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Just my observation. I am an American. I served in the U.S. Army for fourteen years (1986-2000). The way that the soldiers and officers are presented in We Were Soldiers is how many soldiers and officers see themselves and their duty. Yes it is somewhat cornball, but there are many who believe in that corny worldview. It's powerful and patriotism is a major player for those folks. As I got older I found it harder and harder to subscribe to that viewpoint. No I have not become anti-American or a raging Communist. I'm an American and I like my country, but I choose to go in a different direction. Guess I wasn't cut out to be the Square-Jawed All-American Hero Type. Nevertheless those men and women do something that many don't. I don't hold them in low regard and I would never ridicule them. I don't have any use for those who do. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 03:10, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::''Born on the Fourth of July'' tells a story of such a patriotic, All-American young man who fought in Vietnam War and what impact the war had on him. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:02, 14 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==DVD cover==<br />
I was at the rentals the other day and I saw this DVD on the racks. I picked it up, noticed the soldier on the cover was holding an M4A1 CARBINE and then my fingers started to burn from holding the case too long so I put it down. Really dumb error there I gotta say. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]<br />
<br />
If you look on the main page, the name UWE BOLL says it all. ''Wraith''<br />
<br />
:Besides Rampage, which was alright, anything with those two deadly words on the cover is pretty much destined to be junk. I made the mistake of watching the Dungeon Siege movie he did, because it had Jason Statham in it. Guess what, nothing can save a crappy Boll film, nothing on this planet. M14Fanboy (Can't log in for some reason though)<br />
:: agreed as soon a you see uwe boll, just completely erase any thought of it being remotely good[[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 04:15, 4 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==This movie was shot and filmed in SOUTH AFRICA==<br />
That's why the American GREEN uniforms look so wrong. They're the same 'green uniforms' that the Cubans and Russians wore in [[Red Scorpion]] hahahahaha!. Everything is wrong about this movie [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]<br />
:Everything is wrong about Uwe Boll. Where did this guy come from?--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 21:44, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::Germany. I wish we can say he was the product of a Nazi eugenics program to breed the world's worst director, but it's more likely that he's just a hack. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 22:24, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Actually I knew that (rhetorical question), but I like the Nazi eugenics angle. Didn't think of that and it explains so much.LOL--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 11:45, 12 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:1968_Tunnel_Rats&diff=546369Talk:1968 Tunnel Rats2012-04-13T21:27:23Z<p>Masterius: /* Boring as hell */</p>
<hr />
<div>==M16 Three prong flash hiders==<br />
[[Image:TR-ArmiJagerM1622.jpg|thumb|none|400px|check out this rifle, isn't it an AP74?]]<br />
Anyone else notice that these three pronged flash hiders look weird? They sweep down at TOO sharp of an angle. That is why I thought they were [[M16 rifle series#.22 caliber Clones of the M16 Rifle|Adler-Jager AP-74 rifles]] previously. Or possibly the South African Armorers just took the flash hiders off of the AP-74 rifles and retapped them to mount on the M16 Rifles. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Lame uniforms and gear==<br />
What makes me ticked off, is that I could have outfitted this entire movie ACCURATELY with what I have in my closet! Arghhhhh. I am also a collector of Vietnam era militaria (US and Enemy forces). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
well, if you ever work on a uwe boll film you can abuse him after your done....for the rest of us as well [[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 11:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Boring as hell ==<br />
That is probably the only thing I can say about this movie. Just... What was the story? Was there one? I couldn't guess it, I saw it 3 times! -protoAuthor<br />
:That's the bad thing about Vietnam War movies. We still didn't have a Band of Brothers or Saving Private Ryan of the Vietnam War. We really need it. None of that Platoon, Casualties of War Anti-war bullshit. I want one like Band of Brothers were they just show US Grunts living through out 1968 in the middle of the Vietnam War without any political shit. Just show me a accurate depiction of the US Involvement of the Vietnam War, Dammit!-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
::Hamburger Hill and We Were Soldiers are good. They're anti-war, but they show soldiers who are brave, tough, dedicated to the job and to each other. If you haven't already, watch them.-[[User:Crackshot|Crackshot]] 20:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)<br />
:::I have seen the above movies, but I haven't seen Hamburger Hill in nearly 20 years. The closest you will get to ''Band Of Brothers'' or ''The Pacific'' in Vietnam would be the TV series ''Tour Of Duty''. The only really notable politics on the war was an episode where some of the unit went to Hawaii on R&R and they were abused by the citizens. An interesting perspective from a taxi driver who drove the men around, who was of Japanese descent and was interned in WW2, forces them to wonder what they are fighting for. ''Wraith''<br />
:::Am I the only person on this site who ''doesn't'' believe that being pro-war and pro-military are the same thing? A film doesn't have to endorse war as something that's "cool" in order to reflect military personnel in a positive light. The above mentioned ''We Were Soldiers'' is a prime example of this. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:49, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::''We Were Soldiers'' is shameless, filling the screen with square-jawed officers who weep at carnage and fresh-faced GIs who use their last breaths to intone things like, "I'm glad I died for my country." --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:56, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::::''(regarding the critique of WE were Soldiers)'' Not a challenge here, but How old are you Masterius? Have you served in uniform? Are you an American? Since none of this information can be gleaned from your user page, I was just curious. People with different ages & backgrounds have different reactions to things in films. Not saying your post was wrong, but I think you missed the point of the Lt. saying "I'm glad I died for my country" since it was HIS mistake that led to his demise (leading his men into an ill conceived chase of a single lookout into an ambush). It showed that he was loyal and had good motivations, but he wasn't that good of an officer (something hinted at earlier in the film during training). Thus his final words were sad irony. Regarding similar cinema, I usually find myself arguing with young, hip, Europeans on other movie boards about these elements in American cinema, primarily because they do not interpret such scenes the same as someone with my background would. I do agree that director Randall Wallace is really schmaltzy and really goes over the top in sappy sentimentalism. He would have really been better served if he had dialed it back a bit. At any rate, I usually understand different perceptions about films (especially so called patriotic films) if I know the background of the viewer. Even people who share the North American continent and English language, like Canadians, don't have that deep understanding of why Americans react the way they do (generally speaking) :) best regards [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 14:22, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Haven't served myself (although have basic military training from local military base) but I heard stories from Afghan war veterans. These are kind of wars that are pointless and unneeded. Governments pursuing their shady political agenda, throwing young men into the meat grinder far away from their homes. Are they fighting for their country? What did Vietnam have to do with USA, like what did Afghanistan have to do with Soviet Union? Was there any threat, like with Nazism in WW2? The answer would be 'No'. And then those who survived returned home, tried to forget their experience but couldn't because of posttraumatic stress disorder. Being patriotic is not bad at all, but there are cases where patriotism overdose is out of place, as even Americans themselves protested Vietnam War and called for it to end. My two cents. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:27, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::::P.S. Not American, in '''My Location''' is my Nationality.<br />
<br />
==DVD cover==<br />
I was at the rentals the other day and I saw this DVD on the racks. I picked it up, noticed the soldier on the cover was holding an M4A1 CARBINE and then my fingers started to burn from holding the case too long so I put it down. Really dumb error there I gotta say. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]<br />
<br />
If you look on the main page, the name UWE BOLL says it all. ''Wraith''<br />
<br />
:Besides Rampage, which was alright, anything with those two deadly words on the cover is pretty much destined to be junk. I made the mistake of watching the Dungeon Siege movie he did, because it had Jason Statham in it. Guess what, nothing can save a crappy Boll film, nothing on this planet. M14Fanboy (Can't log in for some reason though)<br />
:: agreed as soon a you see uwe boll, just completely erase any thought of it being remotely good[[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 04:15, 4 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==This movie was shot and filmed in SOUTH AFRICA==<br />
That's why the American GREEN uniforms look so wrong. They're the same 'green uniforms' that the Cubans and Russians wore in [[Red Scorpion]] hahahahaha!. Everything is wrong about this movie [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]<br />
:Everything is wrong about Uwe Boll. Where did this guy come from?--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 21:44, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::Germany. I wish we can say he was the product of a Nazi eugenics program to breed the world's worst director, but it's more likely that he's just a hack. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 22:24, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Actually I knew that (rhetorical question), but I like the Nazi eugenics angle. Didn't think of that and it explains so much.LOL--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 11:45, 12 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Remington_Model_700&diff=546264Talk:Remington Model 7002012-04-13T14:38:07Z<p>Masterius: /* M40A5 */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>==Additional Images==<br />
[[Image:Rem700 01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700 with synthetic stock and a Leupold scope - 7mm Remington Magnum]]<br />
[[Image:Rem700.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700P LTR - 7.62x51mm NATO]]<br />
[[File:Remington 700 bdl.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700 BDL - .300 Win. Mag.]]<br />
[[Image:700 XCR II.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700 XCR II - .300 Win. Mag.]]<br />
<br />
==Question==<br />
Im not too good with when specific variants were introduced and I cant seem to find a definite date for the 700 BDL, anyone know EXACTLY when it was released?<br />
<br />
==Distinguishing==<br />
as Americans we all know the popularity and influencialality of the model 700, for any one confused with whether a rifle is an R700 in an AICS chassis and an [[Accuracy International Arctic Warfare series]], look at the bolt. the AI l96 series uses a ball shape bolt at the end of a round piece of metal while the R700 uses a flat "Tab" bolt handle [[User:SargeOverkill]]<br />
<br />
== Remington XM2010 ESR ==<br />
<br />
Should this not have its own page? I know it is derived from the M24 which is the Remington Model 700, but it is fairly different.... --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:05, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I don't think so, as it is basically a Remington 700 in a fancy stock. The real life XM2010 ESRs are actually built from M24 rifles which have been rechambered to .300 Winchester Magnum and accessorised. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:45, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:00, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M24A2 vs. M24A3 ==<br />
<br />
How can one visually differentiate between M24A2 and M24A3? The [[Remington Model 700#M24 Sniper Weapon System|M24 section]] is piled up. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:39, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Different trigger guard design. The M24A3 has a magazine release paddle-like thing, and its magazine is longer and wider. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:14, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== M40A5 ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.usord.com/weapons/m40a5 M40A5] (which is Short Action) allows both 5-round and 10-round magazines through its [http://www.badgerordnance.com/triggerguards/ Badger Ordnance BDM Triggerguard]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:38, 13 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:1968_Tunnel_Rats&diff=546216Talk:1968 Tunnel Rats2012-04-13T12:56:05Z<p>Masterius: /* Boring as hell */</p>
<hr />
<div>==M16 Three prong flash hiders==<br />
[[Image:TR-ArmiJagerM1622.jpg|thumb|none|400px|check out this rifle, isn't it an AP74?]]<br />
Anyone else notice that these three pronged flash hiders look weird? They sweep down at TOO sharp of an angle. That is why I thought they were [[M16 rifle series#.22 caliber Clones of the M16 Rifle|Adler-Jager AP-74 rifles]] previously. Or possibly the South African Armorers just took the flash hiders off of the AP-74 rifles and retapped them to mount on the M16 Rifles. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Lame uniforms and gear==<br />
What makes me ticked off, is that I could have outfitted this entire movie ACCURATELY with what I have in my closet! Arghhhhh. I am also a collector of Vietnam era militaria (US and Enemy forces). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 04:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
well, if you ever work on a uwe boll film you can abuse him after your done....for the rest of us as well [[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 11:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Boring as hell ==<br />
That is probably the only thing I can say about this movie. Just... What was the story? Was there one? I couldn't guess it, I saw it 3 times! -protoAuthor<br />
:That's the bad thing about Vietnam War movies. We still didn't have a Band of Brothers or Saving Private Ryan of the Vietnam War. We really need it. None of that Platoon, Casualties of War Anti-war bullshit. I want one like Band of Brothers were they just show US Grunts living through out 1968 in the middle of the Vietnam War without any political shit. Just show me a accurate depiction of the US Involvement of the Vietnam War, Dammit!-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
::Hamburger Hill and We Were Soldiers are good. They're anti-war, but they show soldiers who are brave, tough, dedicated to the job and to each other. If you haven't already, watch them.-[[User:Crackshot|Crackshot]] 20:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)<br />
:::I have seen the above movies, but I haven't seen Hamburger Hill in nearly 20 years. The closest you will get to ''Band Of Brothers'' or ''The Pacific'' in Vietnam would be the TV series ''Tour Of Duty''. The only really notable politics on the war was an episode where some of the unit went to Hawaii on R&R and they were abused by the citizens. An interesting perspective from a taxi driver who drove the men around, who was of Japanese descent and was interned in WW2, forces them to wonder what they are fighting for. ''Wraith''<br />
:::Am I the only person on this site who ''doesn't'' believe that being pro-war and pro-military are the same thing? A film doesn't have to endorse war as something that's "cool" in order to reflect military personnel in a positive light. The above mentioned ''We Were Soldiers'' is a prime example of this. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:49, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::''We Were Soldiers'' is shameless, filling the screen with square-jawed officers who weep at carnage and fresh-faced GIs who use their last breaths to intone things like, "I'm glad I died for my country." --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:56, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==DVD cover==<br />
I was at the rentals the other day and I saw this DVD on the racks. I picked it up, noticed the soldier on the cover was holding an M4A1 CARBINE and then my fingers started to burn from holding the case too long so I put it down. Really dumb error there I gotta say. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]<br />
<br />
If you look on the main page, the name UWE BOLL says it all. ''Wraith''<br />
<br />
:Besides Rampage, which was alright, anything with those two deadly words on the cover is pretty much destined to be junk. I made the mistake of watching the Dungeon Siege movie he did, because it had Jason Statham in it. Guess what, nothing can save a crappy Boll film, nothing on this planet. M14Fanboy (Can't log in for some reason though)<br />
:: agreed as soon a you see uwe boll, just completely erase any thought of it being remotely good[[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 04:15, 4 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==This movie was shot and filmed in SOUTH AFRICA==<br />
That's why the American GREEN uniforms look so wrong. They're the same 'green uniforms' that the Cubans and Russians wore in [[Red Scorpion]] hahahahaha!. Everything is wrong about this movie [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]<br />
:Everything is wrong about Uwe Boll. Where did this guy come from?--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 21:44, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::Germany. I wish we can say he was the product of a Nazi eugenics program to breed the world's worst director, but it's more likely that he's just a hack. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 22:24, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Actually I knew that (rhetorical question), but I like the Nazi eugenics angle. Didn't think of that and it explains so much.LOL--[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 11:45, 12 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Remington_Model_700&diff=546208Talk:Remington Model 7002012-04-13T11:39:00Z<p>Masterius: /* M24A2 vs. M24A3 */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>==Additional Images==<br />
[[Image:Rem700 01.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700 with synthetic stock and a Leupold scope - 7mm Remington Magnum]]<br />
[[Image:Rem700.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700P LTR - 7.62x51mm NATO]]<br />
[[File:Remington 700 bdl.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700 BDL - .300 Win. Mag.]]<br />
[[Image:700 XCR II.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Remington Model 700 XCR II - .300 Win. Mag.]]<br />
<br />
==Question==<br />
Im not too good with when specific variants were introduced and I cant seem to find a definite date for the 700 BDL, anyone know EXACTLY when it was released?<br />
<br />
==Distinguishing==<br />
as Americans we all know the popularity and influencialality of the model 700, for any one confused with whether a rifle is an R700 in an AICS chassis and an [[Accuracy International Arctic Warfare series]], look at the bolt. the AI l96 series uses a ball shape bolt at the end of a round piece of metal while the R700 uses a flat "Tab" bolt handle [[User:SargeOverkill]]<br />
<br />
== Remington XM2010 ESR ==<br />
<br />
Should this not have its own page? I know it is derived from the M24 which is the Remington Model 700, but it is fairly different.... --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:05, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I don't think so, as it is basically a Remington 700 in a fancy stock. The real life XM2010 ESRs are actually built from M24 rifles which have been rechambered to .300 Winchester Magnum and accessorised. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:45, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:00, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M24A2 vs. M24A3 ==<br />
<br />
How can one visually differentiate between M24A2 and M24A3? The [[Remington Model 700#M24 Sniper Weapon System|M24 section]] is piled up. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:39, 13 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Ghost_Recon:_Future_Soldier&diff=546188Talk:Ghost Recon: Future Soldier2012-04-13T08:22:00Z<p>Masterius: /* Pre-Order Bonus Guns */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Sorry guys==<br />
My computer is running slowly so there is a marked delay in what I type and what page shows up. I did a boo boo because I was on the main VG page and then clicked on the discussion page and my PC took so long to click over I thought the Discussion page WAS the main page. That's what I get for trying to edit quickly when I'm multi-tasking. Apologies. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Fictional Weaponry==<br />
<br />
===MR-B Assault Rifle===<br />
The bullpup assault rifle has a built-in shotgun under the barrel, and the overall design has a faint resemblance with [[IMI Tavor TAR-21]]. It is used by Ghost Recon operatives.<br />
[[Image:GRFS-AR-3.jpg|400px|thumb|none|Fiction Bullpup Assault Rifle, 5.56 Uranium]]<br />
For a magnified version of the upper image:<br />
[http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/108/1083040/ghost-recon-future-soldier-first-look-20100412054623239.jpg]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
These look a little like Magpul PDR's to me.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:01, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"A Fictional/Futuristic Bullpup Multi-Purpose Assault Rifle which, on my opinion, shares only few parts from other Weapons: <br />
the most evident is the Pistol Grip, identical to that of the P90 SMG; the rear part of the Upper Receiver, which would be used as a Cheek Rest, features on the left side of the Weapon (see the first image and magnification) three "Air Intakes" which resemble those appearing on some Handguards (H&K G36, Enfield L85,...). <br />
I believe it is well assembled, but too bulky and heavy, so less maneuverable, and this is a paradox for a Bullpup Weapon! It shouldn't include the "Disputor Shotgun", but as an Underbarrel Attachment! And what is that "Titanium Hook" for? Grappling? If so, it would be very useful, and even more if it were an Accessory, not an integrated part of the Weapon, which is actually a Weapon System.<br />
I hope they will make some changes to the final release of both the Game (that has been postponed to 22 May for the North America and 24 May for the EU) and the Weapon..."<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 13:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Oops, I almost forgot another interesting detail: the "Hologram Sight", which perhaps in 2030 will replace the Red Dot Sight as a Standard Equipment... or just walk next to it."<br />
<br />
===Fictional Assault Rifle #2===<br />
Seems to be based on the [[OTs-14 Groza]] with a AR-15 carry handle. Used by the Ultranationalists and their leader Ivan Illitch Kerenski.<br />
<br />
==But Groza has AR-15 style carry handle? So why it's fictional? ripp<br />
<br />
==Agreed, aside from a few attachments those are perfectly normal Grozas; which makes sense being in the hands of riot police, as it was designed as a close combat weapon, and the ultranationalists that now own the police. I support this being moved to the main page unless its confirmed it will not appear in the game but only the trailer. - Anon<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AK47.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR2-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]] <br />
<br />
These just ook like AN-91's to me. Not sure they're fictional. --[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:03, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
===Fictional Grenade Launcher===<br />
It used by Russian Ultranationalist Forces to fire tear gas shells at the mob. Seems to have been inspired by the [[Brügger & Thomet GL-06]].<br />
[[Image:GRFW-GL.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
===Backpack Rocket Launcher===<br />
[[Image:GRFW-RL.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:30, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Nice... I want some of them; it looks like it was for an Iron Man Armor!!!! <br />
What about "Dual-Wielding" it, on both sides of the Backpack?"<br />
<br />
==Plot and set-up of this game?==<br />
<br />
Is Scott Mitchell, the player character from Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, making a comeback in this game? Will there be a different version for the PC players this time too, as was the case for GRAW2? I like those kinds of "enhanced PC ports" that take full advantage of mouse and keyboard and possibly better hardware as well.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 17:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Not looking good so far...==<br />
It's not the Sci-Fi..ness that gets to me, I mean it bothers me but I could get past it. They could be Jedis and I might still like this(might, but probably not), but what I can't get past is that these designs are just UGLY! DX [[User:Leadback|Leadback]]<br />
<br />
I've been a big fan of Ghost Recon ever since I played the original back in the day (and even liked both Advanced Warfighters, despite the largely mixed reviews they got), but this one is beginning to look ''too much'' like ''Halo'' for my comfort. Fictional weapons, optic camouflage, ''backpack-mounted rocket pods''? What's next, Master Chief armored suits? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Well it's in the discussion section, so it's not too much of a problem [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Good point. Why does the "future" always involve wildly complex electronics, invisibility, and stupid-looking weapons? Maybe the developers started thinking the whole "Future warrior" project and thought it might actually work. In GRAW2, I usually go for the SCAR-L or HK416, with MP5SD secondary and the Mk46 for my support. I don't want or need super-weapons like the melting Xm8 and the doesn't-actualy-exist MR-C. I just hope there's a mission with the enemy sets of an EMP, leaving you with whatever doesn't use electricity. Seriously, optic camo is just dumb. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 13:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I think optic camo is the way of the future when it comes to camo. You are invisible to the enemy. Literally invisible. Don't you think that is much more advantageous than just blending in with camo colors? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]<br />
<br />
Another thing - the game is set in "near future" in late 2020's or early 2030's but in my opinion presented technologies are just too modern. Optical camouflage? Miniature "box-of--chocolate-chip-cookies-sized" rocket launchers capable of taking down a MBT in one shot? Oh, come on. Those things are not even in prototype stage yet. And I strongly doubt they would be in 10-15 years. As someone said, this looks much more like HALO than hard-core military FPS. Probably the best was the first "trilogy" - original Ghost Recon + Desert Siege and Island Thunder expansion packs. Plot line was not so shitty (well yeah, we still got the ultranationalists in Russia but ethnic cleansing in Sudan or collapse of Cuban regime were in my opinion quite realistic), you did not have any super cool hi-tech stuff (like AI driven battle robots, predator-like camouflage or laser guided beer can openers) and one 7,62x39mm round from an AK was capable of killing or incapacitating you. It was Advanced Warfighter, which started this "modern technologies" trend. The game was also set in "near future" (in 2014 to be precise) but it was much more "believable". You know, RC controlled drones/recon UAVs - why not? Military uses UAVs extensively even on todays battlefields and there are plans for further development. And speaking about weapons, "Ghost" were still using HK-416s, SCARs, MP-5s, MK-46s and other good "old fashioned" weapons (ok, there were few oversights like MR-C) rather than bullpup carbines firing "uranium" 5,56 rounds. W-T-F is that? What's next - Ghost Recon going Star Wars style aka Attack of mutant Jedi Clones firing lightsabers from their rocket launchers? My point is - Modern technologies? Fine, but at least make it believable. Is there anyone else who would like to see e.g. 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 based weapons and other non-sci-fi stuff rather than railguns, lasers and plasma carbines? [Ragnar]<br />
<br />
:Unfortunately, highly realistic FPS games like [[SWAT 4]] are at best a niche market now, and less realistic "futuristic" stuff is wildly popular thanks to the success of shooter series like Halo and Gears of War. Nobody likes getting killed in one shot in a game. <br />
<br />
:That said, I did like GRAW2 (though not as much as SWAT 4), and I did like using the XM8 and HK416, as well as the MR-C (HK was working on getting the G11 to work until the Berlin Wall fell, and the other two would be in more general use if it weren't for bureaucratic inertia). Besides, I was thinking that modern military body armour was supposed to stop several 7.62x39mm rounds now.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 16:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Modern combat vests with ceramic SAPI (Small Arms Protective Insert) plates and soft kevlar inserts are supposed to stop 7,62x39 or even 7,62x54R but they are more like to lower the possibility of life threatening wound/protecting you from getting killed than making you invincible Terminator-like war machine from which bullets just bounce off. Usually, when you are hit you don't rush back into combat (even if the SAPI have stopped the bullet) ... of course when the situation requires you are still able to participate in combat or fight back but it is not like in CoD games (or any other similar FPS with "self healing system") - whoa I was hit into my vest ... lets wait five seconds in cover and we're good to go. [Ragnar - 20:06, 12 May 2010]<br />
<br />
:No, I'm not saying I prefer a quick-healing system. I'm just tired of the tendency in certain more realistic games to kill you instantly without telling you where you got shot (which would be believable in places such as through the tactical goggles, or through the face, neck, groin, etc.) when your character are wearing body armour. Many's the time I've been shot dead with one bullet in SWAT 4 by a thug with a 9x19mm pistol, without having been previously injured. Maybe a better system might be to have armour just reduce damage or inflict "consciousness damage" (take too much of that and you are knocked out rather than killed) rather than be treated as health against rounds that are stopped and don't pierce it outright, while each piece of armour is tracked for its "integrity" (or likelihood of stopping/reducing health damage from rounds). That could be more be more realistic and more fun to play with. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 00:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Depleted uranium bullets are a real thing, actually they are THROUGH the prototype phase. Its use lies not in the radioactivity, but in its density. DU is used to make both vehicle armour and armour-piercing bullets by the US military already. Optical camo, while not 100% working right now, has been making HUGE steps forward in Japan. You wear it like a raincoat and you look like a strange shadow. Still noticeable, but nearly there. If it was through prototyping RIGHT NOW, they'd probably already be using it. It's not Halo, it's just the future. It's gonna happen, look out. Anyways, the gun makes sense to me, what doesn't is the idea that the US would have changed its main assault rifle again. The M8 outperformed the SCAR and the M4 by a stunning amount in terms of reliability and ease of use, and it still wasn't adopted. If anything, they should have just standardized the MCR from the last game, made it the mainstay weapon and done some variants of it. Or, realistically, they would probably just keep flogging the mp5-m16/m4 horse. Because everyone wants to just play every war game ever made and to ever BE made with the same weapons again and again. Even in the future, when an assault rifle with possibly equal range, more stopping power and a built in breaching shotgun is invented, all taking up half the space of the M4 it is attempting to replace. Progress on the battlefield? Heaven forbid. That said, aesthetically I'm not really a fan of the grips on the gun. Too ergonomic-looking to go with the rest of the rifle's look. [Erk - 05:46, 24 May 2010]<br />
<br />
::DU would be pointless in a smallarm because the main advantage of DU is being pyrophoric; it's self-sharpening when it impacts at extremely high velocity, and will usually spontaneously ignite once inside a vehicle. It's just added here because like nuclear bullets are awesome, man (or because they're like really evil and stuff, depending on how the plot goes). In an infantry weapon you'd be better off using tungsten carbide, or just switching back to battle rifles as standard infantry arms for the additional penetration of a fullsize rifle round. The XM8 barely outperformed the SCAR (127 stoppages versus 226, and apparently most of that was due to the STANAG magazine of the SCAR being less reliable than the XM8's proprietary one, not the rifles themselves) and from what I've heard the ridiculous numbers of stoppages from the M4 were in no small part due to deliberate use of unapproved maintenance techniques during testing (in other words, it was about as fair a test as the M14 trials). Regardless, this thing is another OICW: a fat gun trying to cram everything the company thinks a soldier needs into it (in this case seemingly even a can opener), resulting in something nobody in their right mind would carry onto the field. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 11:14, 6 March 2011 (MSK)<br />
<br />
I'm not liking the look of the new assault rifle. It looks like a frankin gun. Too much thrown into one thing to be practical. The bipod is so far from the center that to use it would simply be exposing one self and a built in hook? Seriously it just looks ridiculous. Even if it were built of all polymer which it isn't it would weigh like 20 something pounds. No one would be able to handle this weapon effectively. It looks like they're only a few steps off of throwing the chainsaw bayonet on there for good measure. It all just looks too dumb for me.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
: Yep, that's the problem of most of the fictional/futuristic "cool-looking" weapons. They are not designed for functionality but for looks (also majority of game designers does not have any experience with fire arms ... [sarcasm] if you are lucky they only know that weapons do "boom"[end of sarcasm]). And again, I'm not criticizing all game designers or all fictional firearms - there are few nice (it-looks-it-might-actually-work) examples. If I were designing a fictional firearm for such "near-future" FPS I would base it at least on some current weaponry (like in CRYSIS where they took XM-8 or MP-7 and refitted them a bit) - e.g. something like FN 2000 with prolonged barrel, RIS handguard, EGLM (in my opinion better construction than bulky AG36/M320), AN/PEQ 16 style IR designator, EOTech style holographic sight with magnifier and chambered to 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 ... It would look cool but also believable/functional - far more than that uranium rounds firing peice of crap with "hook" in front of the barrel. [Ragnar - 09:46, 14 May 2010]<br />
<br />
: My only problem is that those helmets are fucking ugly and an invitation to catching frag to the brainpan. Why couldn't they use the designs from EndWar? [[Special:Contributions/75.51.147.40|75.51.147.40]] 05:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Seriously. Those helmets are just ridiculously designed. It's not a huge aesthetic thing to have ear covers on helmets. It's almost like they're going out of their way to make things look dumb and practically retarded at the same time. This is I guess the fate that awaits all future settings games. Shame really.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
LoL those are not ear covers those are sky masks or however they're called worn under the helmet they're just white so it looks stupid but they are not ear covers.<br />
<br />
The main weapon defiantly looks retarded IMO: Biggest fault for me is the P90-style pistol grip on a weapon that big. That grip works with a lightweight weapon like the P90, not with a fuck-off big gun like that. And a titanium hook? What the hell would you use that for? Also, am I the only one who noticed how far back the mag is? There is no room for a conventional bolt in there, as far as I can tell. It sure as hell doesn't look like it's caseless, considering the cocking handle halfway up the weapon. And oh god the holosight looks stupid, at least give it something it projects onto or into, not just magically hovering in the air. If they removed the stupid hook and grip at the front and went with a F2000-style stock, with a conventional magazine and a something that looked like a compact digital sight (think Eotech mixed with the F2000's grenade sight), I might buy its a futuristic OICW... it wouldn't look good but at least kind of plausible. As is it looks like something out of Gears of War. *edit* I just noticed the shotgun's magazine is directly under the side rails, making the rails more or less useless as you can't fit anything to them without getting in the way of the shotgun's mag.<br />
<br />
The game has exoskeletons as a dues ex machina answer to the weight of the gear and comm'on DU bullets quick fact A gallon of milk weighs about 8 lbs. A chunk of uranium metal the size of a gallon milk jug weighs over 150 lbs! plz switch to 6.5 ammo a helpful guy<br />
<br />
Well, I have to admit, the E3 demos of being able to fully customize the gun down to the gas tubes were rather impressive, lets hope that the weapons now act if they would correctly. However that's the only aspect of the game I'm impressed by so far tho, what the heck was up with that kinect? Sure as hell didn't look like shooting a rifle :P -Kangabox<br />
<br />
== M249 Para ==<br />
So am I the first one to catch it hiding in the background of the weapon selection screen or did nobody just bother to add it? ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:44, 10 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:In the latest kinect trailer they are calling it "LMG MK48", so I think it's an MK48 with a Para stock if that is possible. Or since there will be an option to customize the butt-stocks, maybe fixed ones will be available also. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 03:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
::It's possible. Ghost Recon seems to have abandoned the 5.56mm SAWs in favor of the Mark 48 ever since the latter's introduction in GR2: Summit Strike. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:32, 12 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Plot? ==<br />
Has anyone heard anything about the plot? I'm wondering if perhaps these Russian ultra-nationalists have any connection to those behind the 2008 Balkan War portrayed in the original Ghost Recon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:37, 10 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'll try to guess the plot.<br />
<br />
::''"Oil. But then...'''Not oil!!!1''' And so there was a war and someone probably stole a nuke / quantum computer / EMP device also. Luckily a team of elite made-up special forces led by a tough former something-or-other (cop, Marine, SEAL, hairdresser, etc) with nothing to lose just manage to maneuver the situation to the point nothing is really resolved and a sequel can be blatantly set up for next year."''<br />
<br />
:This is a calculated guess from playing other videogames. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:33, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
* :D - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yup, sounds about right from my experience, too. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:34, 12 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"It is set in 2030, where Russia went to war; The Ghosts (a 4-man Ghost Team consisting of a Commando (Kozak), a Sniper Weapons expert (Pepper), a Reconnaissance expert (30k), and Ghost Lead) will be fighting an ultra-nationalist force that took control of Russia and are invading neighboring countries; they will visit places such as Norway, the Middle East and Asia."<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancy%27s_Ghost_Recon:_Future_Soldier#cite_note-joystiq.com-2]<br />
<br />
== F this game ==<br />
According to E3 2011 gameplay there will be '''NO''' +1 round in the chamber nor fire-mode selection, also remaining bullets will not be lost when reloading mid-mag. :( I hope they will change it before release otherwise it won't be a real ''tactical'' shooter. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Agreed, most shooters nowadays are plagued by COD Virus :( --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:16, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I'm sorry, but I'm happy as long as a SCAR-L doesn't shoot in tri-burst. :P - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:07, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::I don't mind not losing bullets from mid-mag reloads (after all, it's not like reloading with retention is impossible), as long as the magical elves living in my webbing aren't consolidating my used magazines into full ones. Maybe have a display of the mags you're carrying with red / amber / green to indicate roughly how full they are (since your character, unlike you, knows how much they weigh), and perhaps the ability to cycle preference (most full or most empty). Then again, we're talking about a game with an absurd DU-shooting trouser-cannon, so realism was never really going to be on the menu. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:37, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Indicators for magazines is good. But it won't be because of knowing weight (this isn't realism-like Red Orchestra where you don't know the actual amount of bullets in magazine, there is standard ammo-in-mag counter ;) ) it will be for the sake of convenience :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:19, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Well, what I mean is rather than cluttering up the screen with ammo-in-weapon plus 7-15 other numbers, you'd have your number of bullets in the current magazine and then the colour / fill indicators for the others. To be honest, I don't think it's that realistic to have no idea at all how many bullets you have, since your ''character'' is a soldier who should know that kind of thing, and the HUD is just a way of transferring that information to the player. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:25, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::And since our characters are Ghost Recon operatives with tactical gear (including helmets), for them it ''should'' be natural 8) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:38, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::My Sci-fi story/game has aliens, wrap drive space ships, and mechs, but the weapons, equipment, and handling of said stuff is so realistic it would make most peoples heads hurt. And their not blaster type weapons. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Yeah, being convincing is in the details of how a weapon is handled rather than necessarily in the setting. Then again, my own FPS / story project isn't as scifi as yours, so there. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:49, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==KAC Masterkey==<br />
I think it's not a KAC Masterkey because it seems to be a semi auto shotgun.--[[User:Flavio|Flavio]] 18:51, 19 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 14:40, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Agree with Flavio: the one in the picture looks a Semi-Auto Underbarrel Shotgun...<br />
Anyways, since the M26 MASS has been recently issued by the US Army ([http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/16/army-issues-m26-mass-modular-accessory-shotgun-system/]) as the new Underbarrel Shotgun Attachment and as a new Stand-Alone Shotgun, why would the Ghosts still use the Masterkey, in 2030? They should use a new Underbarrel Shotgun, as for the MR-B Underbarrel Shotgun named "Disputor"..."<br />
<br />
:I think the gun that this is actually based on is a fictional shortened version of the [[Benelli_M_Series_Super_90_Shotguns#Benelli_M4|Benelli M4]]. The cap on the end of the magazine tube is quite distinctive, shape of the receiver is the same, and the grip design is similar albeit slightly shortened. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:35, 21 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::I agree with the previous comments. I'm not sure if it's an M4, but it does look like a semi-automatic and it certainly isn't a Masterkey. [[User:Krakydak|Krakydak]] 10:32, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== AK-12 ==<br />
<br />
This is definitely not an AK-12, as that has a totally different shaped upper receiver and a different safety. It looks kind of like what was being reported as the early AK-200 prototype, but that was just a railed AK-74M. This looks more like an AKM with a AK-74 muzzle brake and Tapco folding stock and new furniture. Also, seeing as this final version of the AK-12 was only unveiled a couple of days ago, it seems very unlikely that is what this gun is based on. Also, that isn't one of the new 60 round magazines, it is a Tapco magazine that has been bulged out to look like a 60. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:51, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:I don't wish to disrespectfully argue with a more experienced member of the site, but I think the in-game render of the gun 99percently resembles the [http://www.gunblog.com/wp-content/gallery/ak-200-rifle/tmp_dropzone_6f_6748799800_.jpg AK-200]. I noted in the text that it is not the AK-12 but the 200, its prototype version. Maybe it would be wise to add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page, and put this there. And then note how the final AK-12 looks like for future references. What do you say? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:28, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Granted it does look more like what was touted as the prototype AK-200 than the AK-12, but looking at the gas block and the front sight block, these are both [[AKM]] type rather than [[AK-74]] type, which is what the AK-200 uses. [http://cdn1.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/tmp_dropzone_6f_6748799800_tfb-tfb.jpg This] is a picture of what is supposedly the AK-200 prototype, which I believe is just either a AK-74M, AK-101 or AK-103 depending on caliber, fitted with a railed handguard and a railed top cover that is hinged and secured with a side mounted lever rather than the button on the rear. This gun might actually have this last point but can't be sure from this screenshot, but as it has the wrong stock,magazine, gas block and front sight, at best this is an AKM/AK-200 hybrid. I imagine the reason for this is that there are not many photos of the AK-200 and they wouldn't have been able to get their hands on one, so they had to base the majority of the modelling on something else. Either way, ID'ing it as an AK-12 and using an AK-12 photo is inaccurate as, if anything, it is an AK-200. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:54, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:::True. We could use a good pic of the 200 though. Anyways I will add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page and move it there, ok? (And let's not forget that this is a video game, every small detail on a gun cannot be correct, right? Just scroll through the [[Soldier of Fortune: Payback]] page, and you will see what I am talking about. XD) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:05, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::::Normally I'd think that if there are details wrong that mean it is actually based on another gun then it should be listed as the gun it actually is. However, I'd imagine that in this case they were genuinely trying to make an AK-200, and got tripped up on a couple of minor details due to the fact that there isn't much good reference material for it, so suppose it is fine leaving it as AK-200 for now. If it turns out with better screenshots that the the top cover of this gun is the same as on a traditional gun and it doesn't have the thumb safety on the left side, then it should be changed, as in that case there will be nothing that matches the AK-200. As for the picture, you could put in the AK-103, as that is close to being the same gun as the 7.62x39mm AK-200 (which I'm assuming this is from the magazine curve), just without the rails and new top cover. I wonder if the devs are pissed off that they put in a gun that was being touted by Russia as their future AK, and then when the gun is already made not only do they change the name of it, but it looks totally different to the earlier rifles. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:49, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:30, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"As TheFirearmBlog.com reported only few days ago [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/16/izhmash-5th-gen-ak-12-photos-and-video/], the AK-200 has been improved and renamed as the AK-12 [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/01/26/kalashnikov-ak-12-unveiled/], being released during this year as the 5th Generation of the original Avtomat Kalashnikova, and in Multiple Calibers. But it doesn't mean that the Ubisoft Team is forced to change thier "AK-200" to the actual "AK-12", as it looks they customized it well, with those Tapco Folding Stock and Fictional "Tapco 60-Round Quad Magazine" (Tapco Industries could think about it...)."<br />
<br />
==Optic Choices==<br />
Screencaps show an Aimpoint Micro, an EOTech XPS with magnifier, and an ACOG variant with a red dot on top. The ACOG and EOTech combo have me most intrigued and wondering if we'll be able to switch between magnification for distance shooting and the red dot for CQB as needed. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:24, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Maybe will be possible for Single Player and absent from Multiplayer for balancing reasons. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::"Balancing" as in, "Let's remove cool features in an effort to prevent people from bitching even though we all know such effort will be utterly pointless"? Yeah, that's the norm these days. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:19, 17 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 21:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Let's see: an Aimpoint Micro T1; an EOTech XPS with 3/4/5/7X Magnifier; a Trijicon ACOG 6X TA648RMR (which includes a Trijicon RMR on the top rail); a Russian Scope, similar to the NPZ Optics PSO-1. <br />
I believe that Hybrid Sights will work as for those seen in Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3... ."<br />
:Well, what one person ''believes'' will happen and what actually ''does'' happen are two different stories. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:02, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Goblin = M6A2 PSD? ==<br />
<br />
Anyone think it might be this weapon?<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:LWRC_psd_RifleA.jpg<br />
<br />
Popularised by Future Weapons et al which is where games have sourced their weapon selections before.<br />
<br />
:No, it has different vent holes and looks like it is modeled with an ambidextrous selector. (Plus LWRCi guns have unique selector pictographs, I doubt the in-game rifle has those.) It is probably better to call it a custom AR-15 variant. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:54, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Pistols? ==<br />
<br />
WHERE ARE THE PISTOLS?I EXPECT PISTOLS?no spec-ops commando action game is good without pistols.<br />
i was looking at some of the gameplay videos and when the Ghosts have two primary weapons then their leg holsters are empty but in the multiplayer sneak peek[UK],when the guy is presenting the multiplayer factions,in the secondary slot a pistol named HG 45T is shown.But this is a Work-In-Progress vid<br />
:There were no clear images or videos of pistols so far. I saw the "45T" too, which is likely referring to the HK45 with a threaded barrel. There was also an MK23-style pistol in one of the gameplay videos but it was not clear enough to make a positive ID. The main thing is there WILL be pistols in the game that is 100 percent. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 17:56, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I saw a single player story trailer and it shows Kozak with a pistol while he's covering a hostage.It might be a MK23,or a USP.I think it looks sort of like a M1911 variant<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEelVBr7_bE&feature=g-vrec&context=G27d85efRVAAAAAAAACA--[[User:Bravo6|Bravo6]] 01:26, 19 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I edited the pistols page.The HK45T definitely appears as the 45T.I saw it in the new Guerilla Mode trailer/Preview--[[User:Bravo6|Bravo6]] 13:36, 29 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Is the assumption of the HK45 just based on the icon and name, because the icon definitnely looks like an FNP-45 to me and they could have just taken the 45 out of FNP-45 and slapped on a T to signify the threaded barrel. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 19:54, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Pre-Order Bonus Guns ==<br />
GameStop is advertising a Mark 14 Mod 0 EBR and an "AK-47" that looks pretty much exactly like the AK-200 already listed on the page (likely the same weapon) as pre-order bonuses [http://www.gamestop.com/collection/ghost-recon-future-soldier]. Additionally, an IGN advertisement for a bonus MP map showed a Ghost with what looks like an HK416 (not a 417, it had a 5.56-shaped mag) in his hands. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:36, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, the weapon is correctly called as 'MK 14' (unlike [[Ghost Recon Online#Mk 14 Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle|GRO]]). That's a rarity nowadays. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:10, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I'm thinking that the designation confusion comes from developers mixing up the M14EBR-RI (a standard semi-auto M14 with an EBR stock) issued to US Army infantry squads with the Mark 14 used by SOF. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:29, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Is there a visual way to differentiate between M14 EBR and M39 EMR? Because I suspect 'M14 EBR' in [[Battlefield Play4Free#M39 Enhanced Marksman Rifle|BFP4F]] might actually be one... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:09, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::I think the BFP4F rifle is an M39, the pistol grip matches as opposed to on the TACOM M14 EBR-RI which has a more contoured finger grooved grip. Another difference is the scope mount, which doesn't apply as the only image on the BFP4F page has it removed. The M39 uses a mount which clamps onto the left side of the M14 receiver, whilst the M14 EBR-RI uses a cantilever mount which is attached to the rear portion of the rail system. Below is a pic of the EBR-RI. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:46, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::[[File:M14 EBR-RI.jpg|thumb|450px|none|TACOM M14 EBR-RI - 7.52x51mm]]<br />
<br />
:::::Ah, that confirms it. The proper M14 EBR hasn't appeared in any commercial media as of yet. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:21, 13 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== HK 45T really is the FN FNP-45T actually ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:FNP-45.jpg|500px]]<br />
<br />
Notice the trigger guard.<br />
<br />
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:24, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
and the grip is more slanted than the HK 45--[[User:BravoKilo|BravoKilo]] 01:35, 13 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Ghost_Recon:_Future_Soldier&diff=545847Talk:Ghost Recon: Future Soldier2012-04-12T17:09:05Z<p>Masterius: /* Pre-Order Bonus Guns */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Sorry guys==<br />
My computer is running slowly so there is a marked delay in what I type and what page shows up. I did a boo boo because I was on the main VG page and then clicked on the discussion page and my PC took so long to click over I thought the Discussion page WAS the main page. That's what I get for trying to edit quickly when I'm multi-tasking. Apologies. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Fictional Weaponry==<br />
<br />
===MR-B Assault Rifle===<br />
The bullpup assault rifle has a built-in shotgun under the barrel, and the overall design has a faint resemblance with [[IMI Tavor TAR-21]]. It is used by Ghost Recon operatives.<br />
[[Image:GRFS-AR-3.jpg|400px|thumb|none|Fiction Bullpup Assault Rifle, 5.56 Uranium]]<br />
For a magnified version of the upper image:<br />
[http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/108/1083040/ghost-recon-future-soldier-first-look-20100412054623239.jpg]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
These look a little like Magpul PDR's to me.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:01, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"A Fictional/Futuristic Bullpup Multi-Purpose Assault Rifle which, on my opinion, shares only few parts from other Weapons: <br />
the most evident is the Pistol Grip, identical to that of the P90 SMG; the rear part of the Upper Receiver, which would be used as a Cheek Rest, features on the left side of the Weapon (see the first image and magnification) three "Air Intakes" which resemble those appearing on some Handguards (H&K G36, Enfield L85,...). <br />
I believe it is well assembled, but too bulky and heavy, so less maneuverable, and this is a paradox for a Bullpup Weapon! It shouldn't include the "Disputor Shotgun", but as an Underbarrel Attachment! And what is that "Titanium Hook" for? Grappling? If so, it would be very useful, and even more if it were an Accessory, not an integrated part of the Weapon, which is actually a Weapon System.<br />
I hope they will make some changes to the final release of both the Game (that has been postponed to 22 May for the North America and 24 May for the EU) and the Weapon..."<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 13:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Oops, I almost forgot another interesting detail: the "Hologram Sight", which perhaps in 2030 will replace the Red Dot Sight as a Standard Equipment... or just walk next to it."<br />
<br />
===Fictional Assault Rifle #2===<br />
Seems to be based on the [[OTs-14 Groza]] with a AR-15 carry handle. Used by the Ultranationalists and their leader Ivan Illitch Kerenski.<br />
<br />
==But Groza has AR-15 style carry handle? So why it's fictional? ripp<br />
<br />
==Agreed, aside from a few attachments those are perfectly normal Grozas; which makes sense being in the hands of riot police, as it was designed as a close combat weapon, and the ultranationalists that now own the police. I support this being moved to the main page unless its confirmed it will not appear in the game but only the trailer. - Anon<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AK47.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR2-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]] <br />
<br />
These just ook like AN-91's to me. Not sure they're fictional. --[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:03, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
===Fictional Grenade Launcher===<br />
It used by Russian Ultranationalist Forces to fire tear gas shells at the mob. Seems to have been inspired by the [[Brügger & Thomet GL-06]].<br />
[[Image:GRFW-GL.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
===Backpack Rocket Launcher===<br />
[[Image:GRFW-RL.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:30, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Nice... I want some of them; it looks like it was for an Iron Man Armor!!!! <br />
What about "Dual-Wielding" it, on both sides of the Backpack?"<br />
<br />
==Plot and set-up of this game?==<br />
<br />
Is Scott Mitchell, the player character from Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, making a comeback in this game? Will there be a different version for the PC players this time too, as was the case for GRAW2? I like those kinds of "enhanced PC ports" that take full advantage of mouse and keyboard and possibly better hardware as well.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 17:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Not looking good so far...==<br />
It's not the Sci-Fi..ness that gets to me, I mean it bothers me but I could get past it. They could be Jedis and I might still like this(might, but probably not), but what I can't get past is that these designs are just UGLY! DX [[User:Leadback|Leadback]]<br />
<br />
I've been a big fan of Ghost Recon ever since I played the original back in the day (and even liked both Advanced Warfighters, despite the largely mixed reviews they got), but this one is beginning to look ''too much'' like ''Halo'' for my comfort. Fictional weapons, optic camouflage, ''backpack-mounted rocket pods''? What's next, Master Chief armored suits? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Well it's in the discussion section, so it's not too much of a problem [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Good point. Why does the "future" always involve wildly complex electronics, invisibility, and stupid-looking weapons? Maybe the developers started thinking the whole "Future warrior" project and thought it might actually work. In GRAW2, I usually go for the SCAR-L or HK416, with MP5SD secondary and the Mk46 for my support. I don't want or need super-weapons like the melting Xm8 and the doesn't-actualy-exist MR-C. I just hope there's a mission with the enemy sets of an EMP, leaving you with whatever doesn't use electricity. Seriously, optic camo is just dumb. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 13:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I think optic camo is the way of the future when it comes to camo. You are invisible to the enemy. Literally invisible. Don't you think that is much more advantageous than just blending in with camo colors? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]<br />
<br />
Another thing - the game is set in "near future" in late 2020's or early 2030's but in my opinion presented technologies are just too modern. Optical camouflage? Miniature "box-of--chocolate-chip-cookies-sized" rocket launchers capable of taking down a MBT in one shot? Oh, come on. Those things are not even in prototype stage yet. And I strongly doubt they would be in 10-15 years. As someone said, this looks much more like HALO than hard-core military FPS. Probably the best was the first "trilogy" - original Ghost Recon + Desert Siege and Island Thunder expansion packs. Plot line was not so shitty (well yeah, we still got the ultranationalists in Russia but ethnic cleansing in Sudan or collapse of Cuban regime were in my opinion quite realistic), you did not have any super cool hi-tech stuff (like AI driven battle robots, predator-like camouflage or laser guided beer can openers) and one 7,62x39mm round from an AK was capable of killing or incapacitating you. It was Advanced Warfighter, which started this "modern technologies" trend. The game was also set in "near future" (in 2014 to be precise) but it was much more "believable". You know, RC controlled drones/recon UAVs - why not? Military uses UAVs extensively even on todays battlefields and there are plans for further development. And speaking about weapons, "Ghost" were still using HK-416s, SCARs, MP-5s, MK-46s and other good "old fashioned" weapons (ok, there were few oversights like MR-C) rather than bullpup carbines firing "uranium" 5,56 rounds. W-T-F is that? What's next - Ghost Recon going Star Wars style aka Attack of mutant Jedi Clones firing lightsabers from their rocket launchers? My point is - Modern technologies? Fine, but at least make it believable. Is there anyone else who would like to see e.g. 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 based weapons and other non-sci-fi stuff rather than railguns, lasers and plasma carbines? [Ragnar]<br />
<br />
:Unfortunately, highly realistic FPS games like [[SWAT 4]] are at best a niche market now, and less realistic "futuristic" stuff is wildly popular thanks to the success of shooter series like Halo and Gears of War. Nobody likes getting killed in one shot in a game. <br />
<br />
:That said, I did like GRAW2 (though not as much as SWAT 4), and I did like using the XM8 and HK416, as well as the MR-C (HK was working on getting the G11 to work until the Berlin Wall fell, and the other two would be in more general use if it weren't for bureaucratic inertia). Besides, I was thinking that modern military body armour was supposed to stop several 7.62x39mm rounds now.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 16:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Modern combat vests with ceramic SAPI (Small Arms Protective Insert) plates and soft kevlar inserts are supposed to stop 7,62x39 or even 7,62x54R but they are more like to lower the possibility of life threatening wound/protecting you from getting killed than making you invincible Terminator-like war machine from which bullets just bounce off. Usually, when you are hit you don't rush back into combat (even if the SAPI have stopped the bullet) ... of course when the situation requires you are still able to participate in combat or fight back but it is not like in CoD games (or any other similar FPS with "self healing system") - whoa I was hit into my vest ... lets wait five seconds in cover and we're good to go. [Ragnar - 20:06, 12 May 2010]<br />
<br />
:No, I'm not saying I prefer a quick-healing system. I'm just tired of the tendency in certain more realistic games to kill you instantly without telling you where you got shot (which would be believable in places such as through the tactical goggles, or through the face, neck, groin, etc.) when your character are wearing body armour. Many's the time I've been shot dead with one bullet in SWAT 4 by a thug with a 9x19mm pistol, without having been previously injured. Maybe a better system might be to have armour just reduce damage or inflict "consciousness damage" (take too much of that and you are knocked out rather than killed) rather than be treated as health against rounds that are stopped and don't pierce it outright, while each piece of armour is tracked for its "integrity" (or likelihood of stopping/reducing health damage from rounds). That could be more be more realistic and more fun to play with. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 00:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Depleted uranium bullets are a real thing, actually they are THROUGH the prototype phase. Its use lies not in the radioactivity, but in its density. DU is used to make both vehicle armour and armour-piercing bullets by the US military already. Optical camo, while not 100% working right now, has been making HUGE steps forward in Japan. You wear it like a raincoat and you look like a strange shadow. Still noticeable, but nearly there. If it was through prototyping RIGHT NOW, they'd probably already be using it. It's not Halo, it's just the future. It's gonna happen, look out. Anyways, the gun makes sense to me, what doesn't is the idea that the US would have changed its main assault rifle again. The M8 outperformed the SCAR and the M4 by a stunning amount in terms of reliability and ease of use, and it still wasn't adopted. If anything, they should have just standardized the MCR from the last game, made it the mainstay weapon and done some variants of it. Or, realistically, they would probably just keep flogging the mp5-m16/m4 horse. Because everyone wants to just play every war game ever made and to ever BE made with the same weapons again and again. Even in the future, when an assault rifle with possibly equal range, more stopping power and a built in breaching shotgun is invented, all taking up half the space of the M4 it is attempting to replace. Progress on the battlefield? Heaven forbid. That said, aesthetically I'm not really a fan of the grips on the gun. Too ergonomic-looking to go with the rest of the rifle's look. [Erk - 05:46, 24 May 2010]<br />
<br />
::DU would be pointless in a smallarm because the main advantage of DU is being pyrophoric; it's self-sharpening when it impacts at extremely high velocity, and will usually spontaneously ignite once inside a vehicle. It's just added here because like nuclear bullets are awesome, man (or because they're like really evil and stuff, depending on how the plot goes). In an infantry weapon you'd be better off using tungsten carbide, or just switching back to battle rifles as standard infantry arms for the additional penetration of a fullsize rifle round. The XM8 barely outperformed the SCAR (127 stoppages versus 226, and apparently most of that was due to the STANAG magazine of the SCAR being less reliable than the XM8's proprietary one, not the rifles themselves) and from what I've heard the ridiculous numbers of stoppages from the M4 were in no small part due to deliberate use of unapproved maintenance techniques during testing (in other words, it was about as fair a test as the M14 trials). Regardless, this thing is another OICW: a fat gun trying to cram everything the company thinks a soldier needs into it (in this case seemingly even a can opener), resulting in something nobody in their right mind would carry onto the field. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 11:14, 6 March 2011 (MSK)<br />
<br />
I'm not liking the look of the new assault rifle. It looks like a frankin gun. Too much thrown into one thing to be practical. The bipod is so far from the center that to use it would simply be exposing one self and a built in hook? Seriously it just looks ridiculous. Even if it were built of all polymer which it isn't it would weigh like 20 something pounds. No one would be able to handle this weapon effectively. It looks like they're only a few steps off of throwing the chainsaw bayonet on there for good measure. It all just looks too dumb for me.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
: Yep, that's the problem of most of the fictional/futuristic "cool-looking" weapons. They are not designed for functionality but for looks (also majority of game designers does not have any experience with fire arms ... [sarcasm] if you are lucky they only know that weapons do "boom"[end of sarcasm]). And again, I'm not criticizing all game designers or all fictional firearms - there are few nice (it-looks-it-might-actually-work) examples. If I were designing a fictional firearm for such "near-future" FPS I would base it at least on some current weaponry (like in CRYSIS where they took XM-8 or MP-7 and refitted them a bit) - e.g. something like FN 2000 with prolonged barrel, RIS handguard, EGLM (in my opinion better construction than bulky AG36/M320), AN/PEQ 16 style IR designator, EOTech style holographic sight with magnifier and chambered to 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 ... It would look cool but also believable/functional - far more than that uranium rounds firing peice of crap with "hook" in front of the barrel. [Ragnar - 09:46, 14 May 2010]<br />
<br />
: My only problem is that those helmets are fucking ugly and an invitation to catching frag to the brainpan. Why couldn't they use the designs from EndWar? [[Special:Contributions/75.51.147.40|75.51.147.40]] 05:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Seriously. Those helmets are just ridiculously designed. It's not a huge aesthetic thing to have ear covers on helmets. It's almost like they're going out of their way to make things look dumb and practically retarded at the same time. This is I guess the fate that awaits all future settings games. Shame really.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
LoL those are not ear covers those are sky masks or however they're called worn under the helmet they're just white so it looks stupid but they are not ear covers.<br />
<br />
The main weapon defiantly looks retarded IMO: Biggest fault for me is the P90-style pistol grip on a weapon that big. That grip works with a lightweight weapon like the P90, not with a fuck-off big gun like that. And a titanium hook? What the hell would you use that for? Also, am I the only one who noticed how far back the mag is? There is no room for a conventional bolt in there, as far as I can tell. It sure as hell doesn't look like it's caseless, considering the cocking handle halfway up the weapon. And oh god the holosight looks stupid, at least give it something it projects onto or into, not just magically hovering in the air. If they removed the stupid hook and grip at the front and went with a F2000-style stock, with a conventional magazine and a something that looked like a compact digital sight (think Eotech mixed with the F2000's grenade sight), I might buy its a futuristic OICW... it wouldn't look good but at least kind of plausible. As is it looks like something out of Gears of War. *edit* I just noticed the shotgun's magazine is directly under the side rails, making the rails more or less useless as you can't fit anything to them without getting in the way of the shotgun's mag.<br />
<br />
The game has exoskeletons as a dues ex machina answer to the weight of the gear and comm'on DU bullets quick fact A gallon of milk weighs about 8 lbs. A chunk of uranium metal the size of a gallon milk jug weighs over 150 lbs! plz switch to 6.5 ammo a helpful guy<br />
<br />
Well, I have to admit, the E3 demos of being able to fully customize the gun down to the gas tubes were rather impressive, lets hope that the weapons now act if they would correctly. However that's the only aspect of the game I'm impressed by so far tho, what the heck was up with that kinect? Sure as hell didn't look like shooting a rifle :P -Kangabox<br />
<br />
== M249 Para ==<br />
So am I the first one to catch it hiding in the background of the weapon selection screen or did nobody just bother to add it? ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:44, 10 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:In the latest kinect trailer they are calling it "LMG MK48", so I think it's an MK48 with a Para stock if that is possible. Or since there will be an option to customize the butt-stocks, maybe fixed ones will be available also. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 03:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
::It's possible. Ghost Recon seems to have abandoned the 5.56mm SAWs in favor of the Mark 48 ever since the latter's introduction in GR2: Summit Strike. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:32, 12 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Plot? ==<br />
Has anyone heard anything about the plot? I'm wondering if perhaps these Russian ultra-nationalists have any connection to those behind the 2008 Balkan War portrayed in the original Ghost Recon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:37, 10 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'll try to guess the plot.<br />
<br />
::''"Oil. But then...'''Not oil!!!1''' And so there was a war and someone probably stole a nuke / quantum computer / EMP device also. Luckily a team of elite made-up special forces led by a tough former something-or-other (cop, Marine, SEAL, hairdresser, etc) with nothing to lose just manage to maneuver the situation to the point nothing is really resolved and a sequel can be blatantly set up for next year."''<br />
<br />
:This is a calculated guess from playing other videogames. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:33, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
* :D - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yup, sounds about right from my experience, too. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:34, 12 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"It is set in 2030, where Russia went to war; The Ghosts (a 4-man Ghost Team consisting of a Commando (Kozak), a Sniper Weapons expert (Pepper), a Reconnaissance expert (30k), and Ghost Lead) will be fighting an ultra-nationalist force that took control of Russia and are invading neighboring countries; they will visit places such as Norway, the Middle East and Asia."<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancy%27s_Ghost_Recon:_Future_Soldier#cite_note-joystiq.com-2]<br />
<br />
== F this game ==<br />
According to E3 2011 gameplay there will be '''NO''' +1 round in the chamber nor fire-mode selection, also remaining bullets will not be lost when reloading mid-mag. :( I hope they will change it before release otherwise it won't be a real ''tactical'' shooter. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Agreed, most shooters nowadays are plagued by COD Virus :( --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:16, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I'm sorry, but I'm happy as long as a SCAR-L doesn't shoot in tri-burst. :P - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:07, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::I don't mind not losing bullets from mid-mag reloads (after all, it's not like reloading with retention is impossible), as long as the magical elves living in my webbing aren't consolidating my used magazines into full ones. Maybe have a display of the mags you're carrying with red / amber / green to indicate roughly how full they are (since your character, unlike you, knows how much they weigh), and perhaps the ability to cycle preference (most full or most empty). Then again, we're talking about a game with an absurd DU-shooting trouser-cannon, so realism was never really going to be on the menu. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:37, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Indicators for magazines is good. But it won't be because of knowing weight (this isn't realism-like Red Orchestra where you don't know the actual amount of bullets in magazine, there is standard ammo-in-mag counter ;) ) it will be for the sake of convenience :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:19, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Well, what I mean is rather than cluttering up the screen with ammo-in-weapon plus 7-15 other numbers, you'd have your number of bullets in the current magazine and then the colour / fill indicators for the others. To be honest, I don't think it's that realistic to have no idea at all how many bullets you have, since your ''character'' is a soldier who should know that kind of thing, and the HUD is just a way of transferring that information to the player. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:25, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::And since our characters are Ghost Recon operatives with tactical gear (including helmets), for them it ''should'' be natural 8) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:38, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::My Sci-fi story/game has aliens, wrap drive space ships, and mechs, but the weapons, equipment, and handling of said stuff is so realistic it would make most peoples heads hurt. And their not blaster type weapons. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Yeah, being convincing is in the details of how a weapon is handled rather than necessarily in the setting. Then again, my own FPS / story project isn't as scifi as yours, so there. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:49, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==KAC Masterkey==<br />
I think it's not a KAC Masterkey because it seems to be a semi auto shotgun.--[[User:Flavio|Flavio]] 18:51, 19 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 14:40, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Agree with Flavio: the one in the picture looks a Semi-Auto Underbarrel Shotgun...<br />
Anyways, since the M26 MASS has been recently issued by the US Army ([http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/16/army-issues-m26-mass-modular-accessory-shotgun-system/]) as the new Underbarrel Shotgun Attachment and as a new Stand-Alone Shotgun, why would the Ghosts still use the Masterkey, in 2030? They should use a new Underbarrel Shotgun, as for the MR-B Underbarrel Shotgun named "Disputor"..."<br />
<br />
:I think the gun that this is actually based on is a fictional shortened version of the [[Benelli_M_Series_Super_90_Shotguns#Benelli_M4|Benelli M4]]. The cap on the end of the magazine tube is quite distinctive, shape of the receiver is the same, and the grip design is similar albeit slightly shortened. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:35, 21 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::I agree with the previous comments. I'm not sure if it's an M4, but it does look like a semi-automatic and it certainly isn't a Masterkey. [[User:Krakydak|Krakydak]] 10:32, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== AK-12 ==<br />
<br />
This is definitely not an AK-12, as that has a totally different shaped upper receiver and a different safety. It looks kind of like what was being reported as the early AK-200 prototype, but that was just a railed AK-74M. This looks more like an AKM with a AK-74 muzzle brake and Tapco folding stock and new furniture. Also, seeing as this final version of the AK-12 was only unveiled a couple of days ago, it seems very unlikely that is what this gun is based on. Also, that isn't one of the new 60 round magazines, it is a Tapco magazine that has been bulged out to look like a 60. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:51, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:I don't wish to disrespectfully argue with a more experienced member of the site, but I think the in-game render of the gun 99percently resembles the [http://www.gunblog.com/wp-content/gallery/ak-200-rifle/tmp_dropzone_6f_6748799800_.jpg AK-200]. I noted in the text that it is not the AK-12 but the 200, its prototype version. Maybe it would be wise to add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page, and put this there. And then note how the final AK-12 looks like for future references. What do you say? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:28, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Granted it does look more like what was touted as the prototype AK-200 than the AK-12, but looking at the gas block and the front sight block, these are both [[AKM]] type rather than [[AK-74]] type, which is what the AK-200 uses. [http://cdn1.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/tmp_dropzone_6f_6748799800_tfb-tfb.jpg This] is a picture of what is supposedly the AK-200 prototype, which I believe is just either a AK-74M, AK-101 or AK-103 depending on caliber, fitted with a railed handguard and a railed top cover that is hinged and secured with a side mounted lever rather than the button on the rear. This gun might actually have this last point but can't be sure from this screenshot, but as it has the wrong stock,magazine, gas block and front sight, at best this is an AKM/AK-200 hybrid. I imagine the reason for this is that there are not many photos of the AK-200 and they wouldn't have been able to get their hands on one, so they had to base the majority of the modelling on something else. Either way, ID'ing it as an AK-12 and using an AK-12 photo is inaccurate as, if anything, it is an AK-200. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:54, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:::True. We could use a good pic of the 200 though. Anyways I will add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page and move it there, ok? (And let's not forget that this is a video game, every small detail on a gun cannot be correct, right? Just scroll through the [[Soldier of Fortune: Payback]] page, and you will see what I am talking about. XD) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:05, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::::Normally I'd think that if there are details wrong that mean it is actually based on another gun then it should be listed as the gun it actually is. However, I'd imagine that in this case they were genuinely trying to make an AK-200, and got tripped up on a couple of minor details due to the fact that there isn't much good reference material for it, so suppose it is fine leaving it as AK-200 for now. If it turns out with better screenshots that the the top cover of this gun is the same as on a traditional gun and it doesn't have the thumb safety on the left side, then it should be changed, as in that case there will be nothing that matches the AK-200. As for the picture, you could put in the AK-103, as that is close to being the same gun as the 7.62x39mm AK-200 (which I'm assuming this is from the magazine curve), just without the rails and new top cover. I wonder if the devs are pissed off that they put in a gun that was being touted by Russia as their future AK, and then when the gun is already made not only do they change the name of it, but it looks totally different to the earlier rifles. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:49, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:30, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"As TheFirearmBlog.com reported only few days ago [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/16/izhmash-5th-gen-ak-12-photos-and-video/], the AK-200 has been improved and renamed as the AK-12 [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/01/26/kalashnikov-ak-12-unveiled/], being released during this year as the 5th Generation of the original Avtomat Kalashnikova, and in Multiple Calibers. But it doesn't mean that the Ubisoft Team is forced to change thier "AK-200" to the actual "AK-12", as it looks they customized it well, with those Tapco Folding Stock and Fictional "Tapco 60-Round Quad Magazine" (Tapco Industries could think about it...)."<br />
<br />
==Optic Choices==<br />
Screencaps show an Aimpoint Micro, an EOTech XPS with magnifier, and an ACOG variant with a red dot on top. The ACOG and EOTech combo have me most intrigued and wondering if we'll be able to switch between magnification for distance shooting and the red dot for CQB as needed. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:24, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Maybe will be possible for Single Player and absent from Multiplayer for balancing reasons. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::"Balancing" as in, "Let's remove cool features in an effort to prevent people from bitching even though we all know such effort will be utterly pointless"? Yeah, that's the norm these days. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:19, 17 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 21:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Let's see: an Aimpoint Micro T1; an EOTech XPS with 3/4/5/7X Magnifier; a Trijicon ACOG 6X TA648RMR (which includes a Trijicon RMR on the top rail); a Russian Scope, similar to the NPZ Optics PSO-1. <br />
I believe that Hybrid Sights will work as for those seen in Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3... ."<br />
:Well, what one person ''believes'' will happen and what actually ''does'' happen are two different stories. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:02, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Goblin = M6A2 PSD? ==<br />
<br />
Anyone think it might be this weapon?<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:LWRC_psd_RifleA.jpg<br />
<br />
Popularised by Future Weapons et al which is where games have sourced their weapon selections before.<br />
<br />
:No, it has different vent holes and looks like it is modeled with an ambidextrous selector. (Plus LWRCi guns have unique selector pictographs, I doubt the in-game rifle has those.) It is probably better to call it a custom AR-15 variant. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:54, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Pistols? ==<br />
<br />
WHERE ARE THE PISTOLS?I EXPECT PISTOLS?no spec-ops commando action game is good without pistols.<br />
i was looking at some of the gameplay videos and when the Ghosts have two primary weapons then their leg holsters are empty but in the multiplayer sneak peek[UK],when the guy is presenting the multiplayer factions,in the secondary slot a pistol named HG 45T is shown.But this is a Work-In-Progress vid<br />
:There were no clear images or videos of pistols so far. I saw the "45T" too, which is likely referring to the HK45 with a threaded barrel. There was also an MK23-style pistol in one of the gameplay videos but it was not clear enough to make a positive ID. The main thing is there WILL be pistols in the game that is 100 percent. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 17:56, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I saw a single player story trailer and it shows Kozak with a pistol while he's covering a hostage.It might be a MK23,or a USP.I think it looks sort of like a M1911 variant<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEelVBr7_bE&feature=g-vrec&context=G27d85efRVAAAAAAAACA--[[User:Bravo6|Bravo6]] 01:26, 19 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I edited the pistols page.The HK45T definitely appears as the 45T.I saw it in the new Guerilla Mode trailer/Preview--[[User:Bravo6|Bravo6]] 13:36, 29 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Is the assumption of the HK45 just based on the icon and name, because the icon definitnely looks like an FNP-45 to me and they could have just taken the 45 out of FNP-45 and slapped on a T to signify the threaded barrel. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 19:54, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Pre-Order Bonus Guns ==<br />
GameStop is advertising a Mark 14 Mod 0 EBR and an "AK-47" that looks pretty much exactly like the AK-200 already listed on the page (likely the same weapon) as pre-order bonuses [http://www.gamestop.com/collection/ghost-recon-future-soldier]. Additionally, an IGN advertisement for a bonus MP map showed a Ghost with what looks like an HK416 (not a 417, it had a 5.56-shaped mag) in his hands. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:36, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, the weapon is correctly called as 'MK 14' (unlike [[Ghost Recon Online#Mk 14 Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle|GRO]]). That's a rarity nowadays. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:10, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I'm thinking that the designation confusion comes from developers mixing up the M14EBR-RI (a standard semi-auto M14 with an EBR stock) issued to US Army infantry squads with the Mark 14 used by SOF. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:29, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Is there a visual way to differentiate between M14 EBR and M39 EMR? Because I suspect 'M14 EBR' in [[Battlefield Play4Free#M39 Enhanced Marksman Rifle|BFP4F]] might actually be one... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:09, 12 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Ghost_Recon:_Future_Soldier&diff=545777Talk:Ghost Recon: Future Soldier2012-04-12T14:10:52Z<p>Masterius: /* Pre-Order Bonus Guns */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Sorry guys==<br />
My computer is running slowly so there is a marked delay in what I type and what page shows up. I did a boo boo because I was on the main VG page and then clicked on the discussion page and my PC took so long to click over I thought the Discussion page WAS the main page. That's what I get for trying to edit quickly when I'm multi-tasking. Apologies. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Fictional Weaponry==<br />
<br />
===MR-B Assault Rifle===<br />
The bullpup assault rifle has a built-in shotgun under the barrel, and the overall design has a faint resemblance with [[IMI Tavor TAR-21]]. It is used by Ghost Recon operatives.<br />
[[Image:GRFS-AR-3.jpg|400px|thumb|none|Fiction Bullpup Assault Rifle, 5.56 Uranium]]<br />
For a magnified version of the upper image:<br />
[http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/image/article/108/1083040/ghost-recon-future-soldier-first-look-20100412054623239.jpg]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
These look a little like Magpul PDR's to me.--[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:01, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"A Fictional/Futuristic Bullpup Multi-Purpose Assault Rifle which, on my opinion, shares only few parts from other Weapons: <br />
the most evident is the Pistol Grip, identical to that of the P90 SMG; the rear part of the Upper Receiver, which would be used as a Cheek Rest, features on the left side of the Weapon (see the first image and magnification) three "Air Intakes" which resemble those appearing on some Handguards (H&K G36, Enfield L85,...). <br />
I believe it is well assembled, but too bulky and heavy, so less maneuverable, and this is a paradox for a Bullpup Weapon! It shouldn't include the "Disputor Shotgun", but as an Underbarrel Attachment! And what is that "Titanium Hook" for? Grappling? If so, it would be very useful, and even more if it were an Accessory, not an integrated part of the Weapon, which is actually a Weapon System.<br />
I hope they will make some changes to the final release of both the Game (that has been postponed to 22 May for the North America and 24 May for the EU) and the Weapon..."<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 13:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Oops, I almost forgot another interesting detail: the "Hologram Sight", which perhaps in 2030 will replace the Red Dot Sight as a Standard Equipment... or just walk next to it."<br />
<br />
===Fictional Assault Rifle #2===<br />
Seems to be based on the [[OTs-14 Groza]] with a AR-15 carry handle. Used by the Ultranationalists and their leader Ivan Illitch Kerenski.<br />
<br />
==But Groza has AR-15 style carry handle? So why it's fictional? ripp<br />
<br />
==Agreed, aside from a few attachments those are perfectly normal Grozas; which makes sense being in the hands of riot police, as it was designed as a close combat weapon, and the ultranationalists that now own the police. I support this being moved to the main page unless its confirmed it will not appear in the game but only the trailer. - Anon<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AK47.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
[[Image:GRFW-AR2-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px]] <br />
<br />
These just ook like AN-91's to me. Not sure they're fictional. --[[User:Jackie.45Cal|Jackie.45Cal]] 16:03, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
===Fictional Grenade Launcher===<br />
It used by Russian Ultranationalist Forces to fire tear gas shells at the mob. Seems to have been inspired by the [[Brügger & Thomet GL-06]].<br />
[[Image:GRFW-GL.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
===Backpack Rocket Launcher===<br />
[[Image:GRFW-RL.jpg|thumb|none|500px]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:30, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Nice... I want some of them; it looks like it was for an Iron Man Armor!!!! <br />
What about "Dual-Wielding" it, on both sides of the Backpack?"<br />
<br />
==Plot and set-up of this game?==<br />
<br />
Is Scott Mitchell, the player character from Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, making a comeback in this game? Will there be a different version for the PC players this time too, as was the case for GRAW2? I like those kinds of "enhanced PC ports" that take full advantage of mouse and keyboard and possibly better hardware as well.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 17:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Not looking good so far...==<br />
It's not the Sci-Fi..ness that gets to me, I mean it bothers me but I could get past it. They could be Jedis and I might still like this(might, but probably not), but what I can't get past is that these designs are just UGLY! DX [[User:Leadback|Leadback]]<br />
<br />
I've been a big fan of Ghost Recon ever since I played the original back in the day (and even liked both Advanced Warfighters, despite the largely mixed reviews they got), but this one is beginning to look ''too much'' like ''Halo'' for my comfort. Fictional weapons, optic camouflage, ''backpack-mounted rocket pods''? What's next, Master Chief armored suits? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Well it's in the discussion section, so it's not too much of a problem [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 06:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Good point. Why does the "future" always involve wildly complex electronics, invisibility, and stupid-looking weapons? Maybe the developers started thinking the whole "Future warrior" project and thought it might actually work. In GRAW2, I usually go for the SCAR-L or HK416, with MP5SD secondary and the Mk46 for my support. I don't want or need super-weapons like the melting Xm8 and the doesn't-actualy-exist MR-C. I just hope there's a mission with the enemy sets of an EMP, leaving you with whatever doesn't use electricity. Seriously, optic camo is just dumb. --[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 13:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I think optic camo is the way of the future when it comes to camo. You are invisible to the enemy. Literally invisible. Don't you think that is much more advantageous than just blending in with camo colors? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]]<br />
<br />
Another thing - the game is set in "near future" in late 2020's or early 2030's but in my opinion presented technologies are just too modern. Optical camouflage? Miniature "box-of--chocolate-chip-cookies-sized" rocket launchers capable of taking down a MBT in one shot? Oh, come on. Those things are not even in prototype stage yet. And I strongly doubt they would be in 10-15 years. As someone said, this looks much more like HALO than hard-core military FPS. Probably the best was the first "trilogy" - original Ghost Recon + Desert Siege and Island Thunder expansion packs. Plot line was not so shitty (well yeah, we still got the ultranationalists in Russia but ethnic cleansing in Sudan or collapse of Cuban regime were in my opinion quite realistic), you did not have any super cool hi-tech stuff (like AI driven battle robots, predator-like camouflage or laser guided beer can openers) and one 7,62x39mm round from an AK was capable of killing or incapacitating you. It was Advanced Warfighter, which started this "modern technologies" trend. The game was also set in "near future" (in 2014 to be precise) but it was much more "believable". You know, RC controlled drones/recon UAVs - why not? Military uses UAVs extensively even on todays battlefields and there are plans for further development. And speaking about weapons, "Ghost" were still using HK-416s, SCARs, MP-5s, MK-46s and other good "old fashioned" weapons (ok, there were few oversights like MR-C) rather than bullpup carbines firing "uranium" 5,56 rounds. W-T-F is that? What's next - Ghost Recon going Star Wars style aka Attack of mutant Jedi Clones firing lightsabers from their rocket launchers? My point is - Modern technologies? Fine, but at least make it believable. Is there anyone else who would like to see e.g. 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 based weapons and other non-sci-fi stuff rather than railguns, lasers and plasma carbines? [Ragnar]<br />
<br />
:Unfortunately, highly realistic FPS games like [[SWAT 4]] are at best a niche market now, and less realistic "futuristic" stuff is wildly popular thanks to the success of shooter series like Halo and Gears of War. Nobody likes getting killed in one shot in a game. <br />
<br />
:That said, I did like GRAW2 (though not as much as SWAT 4), and I did like using the XM8 and HK416, as well as the MR-C (HK was working on getting the G11 to work until the Berlin Wall fell, and the other two would be in more general use if it weren't for bureaucratic inertia). Besides, I was thinking that modern military body armour was supposed to stop several 7.62x39mm rounds now.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 16:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Modern combat vests with ceramic SAPI (Small Arms Protective Insert) plates and soft kevlar inserts are supposed to stop 7,62x39 or even 7,62x54R but they are more like to lower the possibility of life threatening wound/protecting you from getting killed than making you invincible Terminator-like war machine from which bullets just bounce off. Usually, when you are hit you don't rush back into combat (even if the SAPI have stopped the bullet) ... of course when the situation requires you are still able to participate in combat or fight back but it is not like in CoD games (or any other similar FPS with "self healing system") - whoa I was hit into my vest ... lets wait five seconds in cover and we're good to go. [Ragnar - 20:06, 12 May 2010]<br />
<br />
:No, I'm not saying I prefer a quick-healing system. I'm just tired of the tendency in certain more realistic games to kill you instantly without telling you where you got shot (which would be believable in places such as through the tactical goggles, or through the face, neck, groin, etc.) when your character are wearing body armour. Many's the time I've been shot dead with one bullet in SWAT 4 by a thug with a 9x19mm pistol, without having been previously injured. Maybe a better system might be to have armour just reduce damage or inflict "consciousness damage" (take too much of that and you are knocked out rather than killed) rather than be treated as health against rounds that are stopped and don't pierce it outright, while each piece of armour is tracked for its "integrity" (or likelihood of stopping/reducing health damage from rounds). That could be more be more realistic and more fun to play with. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 00:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Depleted uranium bullets are a real thing, actually they are THROUGH the prototype phase. Its use lies not in the radioactivity, but in its density. DU is used to make both vehicle armour and armour-piercing bullets by the US military already. Optical camo, while not 100% working right now, has been making HUGE steps forward in Japan. You wear it like a raincoat and you look like a strange shadow. Still noticeable, but nearly there. If it was through prototyping RIGHT NOW, they'd probably already be using it. It's not Halo, it's just the future. It's gonna happen, look out. Anyways, the gun makes sense to me, what doesn't is the idea that the US would have changed its main assault rifle again. The M8 outperformed the SCAR and the M4 by a stunning amount in terms of reliability and ease of use, and it still wasn't adopted. If anything, they should have just standardized the MCR from the last game, made it the mainstay weapon and done some variants of it. Or, realistically, they would probably just keep flogging the mp5-m16/m4 horse. Because everyone wants to just play every war game ever made and to ever BE made with the same weapons again and again. Even in the future, when an assault rifle with possibly equal range, more stopping power and a built in breaching shotgun is invented, all taking up half the space of the M4 it is attempting to replace. Progress on the battlefield? Heaven forbid. That said, aesthetically I'm not really a fan of the grips on the gun. Too ergonomic-looking to go with the rest of the rifle's look. [Erk - 05:46, 24 May 2010]<br />
<br />
::DU would be pointless in a smallarm because the main advantage of DU is being pyrophoric; it's self-sharpening when it impacts at extremely high velocity, and will usually spontaneously ignite once inside a vehicle. It's just added here because like nuclear bullets are awesome, man (or because they're like really evil and stuff, depending on how the plot goes). In an infantry weapon you'd be better off using tungsten carbide, or just switching back to battle rifles as standard infantry arms for the additional penetration of a fullsize rifle round. The XM8 barely outperformed the SCAR (127 stoppages versus 226, and apparently most of that was due to the STANAG magazine of the SCAR being less reliable than the XM8's proprietary one, not the rifles themselves) and from what I've heard the ridiculous numbers of stoppages from the M4 were in no small part due to deliberate use of unapproved maintenance techniques during testing (in other words, it was about as fair a test as the M14 trials). Regardless, this thing is another OICW: a fat gun trying to cram everything the company thinks a soldier needs into it (in this case seemingly even a can opener), resulting in something nobody in their right mind would carry onto the field. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 11:14, 6 March 2011 (MSK)<br />
<br />
I'm not liking the look of the new assault rifle. It looks like a frankin gun. Too much thrown into one thing to be practical. The bipod is so far from the center that to use it would simply be exposing one self and a built in hook? Seriously it just looks ridiculous. Even if it were built of all polymer which it isn't it would weigh like 20 something pounds. No one would be able to handle this weapon effectively. It looks like they're only a few steps off of throwing the chainsaw bayonet on there for good measure. It all just looks too dumb for me.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
: Yep, that's the problem of most of the fictional/futuristic "cool-looking" weapons. They are not designed for functionality but for looks (also majority of game designers does not have any experience with fire arms ... [sarcasm] if you are lucky they only know that weapons do "boom"[end of sarcasm]). And again, I'm not criticizing all game designers or all fictional firearms - there are few nice (it-looks-it-might-actually-work) examples. If I were designing a fictional firearm for such "near-future" FPS I would base it at least on some current weaponry (like in CRYSIS where they took XM-8 or MP-7 and refitted them a bit) - e.g. something like FN 2000 with prolonged barrel, RIS handguard, EGLM (in my opinion better construction than bulky AG36/M320), AN/PEQ 16 style IR designator, EOTech style holographic sight with magnifier and chambered to 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 ... It would look cool but also believable/functional - far more than that uranium rounds firing peice of crap with "hook" in front of the barrel. [Ragnar - 09:46, 14 May 2010]<br />
<br />
: My only problem is that those helmets are fucking ugly and an invitation to catching frag to the brainpan. Why couldn't they use the designs from EndWar? [[Special:Contributions/75.51.147.40|75.51.147.40]] 05:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Seriously. Those helmets are just ridiculously designed. It's not a huge aesthetic thing to have ear covers on helmets. It's almost like they're going out of their way to make things look dumb and practically retarded at the same time. This is I guess the fate that awaits all future settings games. Shame really.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
LoL those are not ear covers those are sky masks or however they're called worn under the helmet they're just white so it looks stupid but they are not ear covers.<br />
<br />
The main weapon defiantly looks retarded IMO: Biggest fault for me is the P90-style pistol grip on a weapon that big. That grip works with a lightweight weapon like the P90, not with a fuck-off big gun like that. And a titanium hook? What the hell would you use that for? Also, am I the only one who noticed how far back the mag is? There is no room for a conventional bolt in there, as far as I can tell. It sure as hell doesn't look like it's caseless, considering the cocking handle halfway up the weapon. And oh god the holosight looks stupid, at least give it something it projects onto or into, not just magically hovering in the air. If they removed the stupid hook and grip at the front and went with a F2000-style stock, with a conventional magazine and a something that looked like a compact digital sight (think Eotech mixed with the F2000's grenade sight), I might buy its a futuristic OICW... it wouldn't look good but at least kind of plausible. As is it looks like something out of Gears of War. *edit* I just noticed the shotgun's magazine is directly under the side rails, making the rails more or less useless as you can't fit anything to them without getting in the way of the shotgun's mag.<br />
<br />
The game has exoskeletons as a dues ex machina answer to the weight of the gear and comm'on DU bullets quick fact A gallon of milk weighs about 8 lbs. A chunk of uranium metal the size of a gallon milk jug weighs over 150 lbs! plz switch to 6.5 ammo a helpful guy<br />
<br />
Well, I have to admit, the E3 demos of being able to fully customize the gun down to the gas tubes were rather impressive, lets hope that the weapons now act if they would correctly. However that's the only aspect of the game I'm impressed by so far tho, what the heck was up with that kinect? Sure as hell didn't look like shooting a rifle :P -Kangabox<br />
<br />
== M249 Para ==<br />
So am I the first one to catch it hiding in the background of the weapon selection screen or did nobody just bother to add it? ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:44, 10 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:In the latest kinect trailer they are calling it "LMG MK48", so I think it's an MK48 with a Para stock if that is possible. Or since there will be an option to customize the butt-stocks, maybe fixed ones will be available also. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 03:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
::It's possible. Ghost Recon seems to have abandoned the 5.56mm SAWs in favor of the Mark 48 ever since the latter's introduction in GR2: Summit Strike. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:32, 12 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Plot? ==<br />
Has anyone heard anything about the plot? I'm wondering if perhaps these Russian ultra-nationalists have any connection to those behind the 2008 Balkan War portrayed in the original Ghost Recon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:37, 10 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'll try to guess the plot.<br />
<br />
::''"Oil. But then...'''Not oil!!!1''' And so there was a war and someone probably stole a nuke / quantum computer / EMP device also. Luckily a team of elite made-up special forces led by a tough former something-or-other (cop, Marine, SEAL, hairdresser, etc) with nothing to lose just manage to maneuver the situation to the point nothing is really resolved and a sequel can be blatantly set up for next year."''<br />
<br />
:This is a calculated guess from playing other videogames. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:33, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
* :D - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yup, sounds about right from my experience, too. XD [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:34, 12 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"It is set in 2030, where Russia went to war; The Ghosts (a 4-man Ghost Team consisting of a Commando (Kozak), a Sniper Weapons expert (Pepper), a Reconnaissance expert (30k), and Ghost Lead) will be fighting an ultra-nationalist force that took control of Russia and are invading neighboring countries; they will visit places such as Norway, the Middle East and Asia."<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancy%27s_Ghost_Recon:_Future_Soldier#cite_note-joystiq.com-2]<br />
<br />
== F this game ==<br />
According to E3 2011 gameplay there will be '''NO''' +1 round in the chamber nor fire-mode selection, also remaining bullets will not be lost when reloading mid-mag. :( I hope they will change it before release otherwise it won't be a real ''tactical'' shooter. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Agreed, most shooters nowadays are plagued by COD Virus :( --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:16, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::I'm sorry, but I'm happy as long as a SCAR-L doesn't shoot in tri-burst. :P - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:07, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::I don't mind not losing bullets from mid-mag reloads (after all, it's not like reloading with retention is impossible), as long as the magical elves living in my webbing aren't consolidating my used magazines into full ones. Maybe have a display of the mags you're carrying with red / amber / green to indicate roughly how full they are (since your character, unlike you, knows how much they weigh), and perhaps the ability to cycle preference (most full or most empty). Then again, we're talking about a game with an absurd DU-shooting trouser-cannon, so realism was never really going to be on the menu. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:37, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Indicators for magazines is good. But it won't be because of knowing weight (this isn't realism-like Red Orchestra where you don't know the actual amount of bullets in magazine, there is standard ammo-in-mag counter ;) ) it will be for the sake of convenience :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:19, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Well, what I mean is rather than cluttering up the screen with ammo-in-weapon plus 7-15 other numbers, you'd have your number of bullets in the current magazine and then the colour / fill indicators for the others. To be honest, I don't think it's that realistic to have no idea at all how many bullets you have, since your ''character'' is a soldier who should know that kind of thing, and the HUD is just a way of transferring that information to the player. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:25, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::And since our characters are Ghost Recon operatives with tactical gear (including helmets), for them it ''should'' be natural 8) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:38, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::My Sci-fi story/game has aliens, wrap drive space ships, and mechs, but the weapons, equipment, and handling of said stuff is so realistic it would make most peoples heads hurt. And their not blaster type weapons. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Yeah, being convincing is in the details of how a weapon is handled rather than necessarily in the setting. Then again, my own FPS / story project isn't as scifi as yours, so there. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:49, 20 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==KAC Masterkey==<br />
I think it's not a KAC Masterkey because it seems to be a semi auto shotgun.--[[User:Flavio|Flavio]] 18:51, 19 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 14:40, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Agree with Flavio: the one in the picture looks a Semi-Auto Underbarrel Shotgun...<br />
Anyways, since the M26 MASS has been recently issued by the US Army ([http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/16/army-issues-m26-mass-modular-accessory-shotgun-system/]) as the new Underbarrel Shotgun Attachment and as a new Stand-Alone Shotgun, why would the Ghosts still use the Masterkey, in 2030? They should use a new Underbarrel Shotgun, as for the MR-B Underbarrel Shotgun named "Disputor"..."<br />
<br />
:I think the gun that this is actually based on is a fictional shortened version of the [[Benelli_M_Series_Super_90_Shotguns#Benelli_M4|Benelli M4]]. The cap on the end of the magazine tube is quite distinctive, shape of the receiver is the same, and the grip design is similar albeit slightly shortened. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:35, 21 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::I agree with the previous comments. I'm not sure if it's an M4, but it does look like a semi-automatic and it certainly isn't a Masterkey. [[User:Krakydak|Krakydak]] 10:32, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== AK-12 ==<br />
<br />
This is definitely not an AK-12, as that has a totally different shaped upper receiver and a different safety. It looks kind of like what was being reported as the early AK-200 prototype, but that was just a railed AK-74M. This looks more like an AKM with a AK-74 muzzle brake and Tapco folding stock and new furniture. Also, seeing as this final version of the AK-12 was only unveiled a couple of days ago, it seems very unlikely that is what this gun is based on. Also, that isn't one of the new 60 round magazines, it is a Tapco magazine that has been bulged out to look like a 60. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:51, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:I don't wish to disrespectfully argue with a more experienced member of the site, but I think the in-game render of the gun 99percently resembles the [http://www.gunblog.com/wp-content/gallery/ak-200-rifle/tmp_dropzone_6f_6748799800_.jpg AK-200]. I noted in the text that it is not the AK-12 but the 200, its prototype version. Maybe it would be wise to add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page, and put this there. And then note how the final AK-12 looks like for future references. What do you say? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:28, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Granted it does look more like what was touted as the prototype AK-200 than the AK-12, but looking at the gas block and the front sight block, these are both [[AKM]] type rather than [[AK-74]] type, which is what the AK-200 uses. [http://cdn1.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/tmp_dropzone_6f_6748799800_tfb-tfb.jpg This] is a picture of what is supposedly the AK-200 prototype, which I believe is just either a AK-74M, AK-101 or AK-103 depending on caliber, fitted with a railed handguard and a railed top cover that is hinged and secured with a side mounted lever rather than the button on the rear. This gun might actually have this last point but can't be sure from this screenshot, but as it has the wrong stock,magazine, gas block and front sight, at best this is an AKM/AK-200 hybrid. I imagine the reason for this is that there are not many photos of the AK-200 and they wouldn't have been able to get their hands on one, so they had to base the majority of the modelling on something else. Either way, ID'ing it as an AK-12 and using an AK-12 photo is inaccurate as, if anything, it is an AK-200. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:54, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:::True. We could use a good pic of the 200 though. Anyways I will add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page and move it there, ok? (And let's not forget that this is a video game, every small detail on a gun cannot be correct, right? Just scroll through the [[Soldier of Fortune: Payback]] page, and you will see what I am talking about. XD) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:05, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::::Normally I'd think that if there are details wrong that mean it is actually based on another gun then it should be listed as the gun it actually is. However, I'd imagine that in this case they were genuinely trying to make an AK-200, and got tripped up on a couple of minor details due to the fact that there isn't much good reference material for it, so suppose it is fine leaving it as AK-200 for now. If it turns out with better screenshots that the the top cover of this gun is the same as on a traditional gun and it doesn't have the thumb safety on the left side, then it should be changed, as in that case there will be nothing that matches the AK-200. As for the picture, you could put in the AK-103, as that is close to being the same gun as the 7.62x39mm AK-200 (which I'm assuming this is from the magazine curve), just without the rails and new top cover. I wonder if the devs are pissed off that they put in a gun that was being touted by Russia as their future AK, and then when the gun is already made not only do they change the name of it, but it looks totally different to the earlier rifles. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:49, 29 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 15:30, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"As TheFirearmBlog.com reported only few days ago [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/16/izhmash-5th-gen-ak-12-photos-and-video/], the AK-200 has been improved and renamed as the AK-12 [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/01/26/kalashnikov-ak-12-unveiled/], being released during this year as the 5th Generation of the original Avtomat Kalashnikova, and in Multiple Calibers. But it doesn't mean that the Ubisoft Team is forced to change thier "AK-200" to the actual "AK-12", as it looks they customized it well, with those Tapco Folding Stock and Fictional "Tapco 60-Round Quad Magazine" (Tapco Industries could think about it...)."<br />
<br />
==Optic Choices==<br />
Screencaps show an Aimpoint Micro, an EOTech XPS with magnifier, and an ACOG variant with a red dot on top. The ACOG and EOTech combo have me most intrigued and wondering if we'll be able to switch between magnification for distance shooting and the red dot for CQB as needed. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:24, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Maybe will be possible for Single Player and absent from Multiplayer for balancing reasons. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::"Balancing" as in, "Let's remove cool features in an effort to prevent people from bitching even though we all know such effort will be utterly pointless"? Yeah, that's the norm these days. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:19, 17 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 21:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Let's see: an Aimpoint Micro T1; an EOTech XPS with 3/4/5/7X Magnifier; a Trijicon ACOG 6X TA648RMR (which includes a Trijicon RMR on the top rail); a Russian Scope, similar to the NPZ Optics PSO-1. <br />
I believe that Hybrid Sights will work as for those seen in Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 3... ."<br />
:Well, what one person ''believes'' will happen and what actually ''does'' happen are two different stories. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:02, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Goblin = M6A2 PSD? ==<br />
<br />
Anyone think it might be this weapon?<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:LWRC_psd_RifleA.jpg<br />
<br />
Popularised by Future Weapons et al which is where games have sourced their weapon selections before.<br />
<br />
:No, it has different vent holes and looks like it is modeled with an ambidextrous selector. (Plus LWRCi guns have unique selector pictographs, I doubt the in-game rifle has those.) It is probably better to call it a custom AR-15 variant. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:54, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Pistols? ==<br />
<br />
WHERE ARE THE PISTOLS?I EXPECT PISTOLS?no spec-ops commando action game is good without pistols.<br />
i was looking at some of the gameplay videos and when the Ghosts have two primary weapons then their leg holsters are empty but in the multiplayer sneak peek[UK],when the guy is presenting the multiplayer factions,in the secondary slot a pistol named HG 45T is shown.But this is a Work-In-Progress vid<br />
:There were no clear images or videos of pistols so far. I saw the "45T" too, which is likely referring to the HK45 with a threaded barrel. There was also an MK23-style pistol in one of the gameplay videos but it was not clear enough to make a positive ID. The main thing is there WILL be pistols in the game that is 100 percent. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 17:56, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I saw a single player story trailer and it shows Kozak with a pistol while he's covering a hostage.It might be a MK23,or a USP.I think it looks sort of like a M1911 variant<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEelVBr7_bE&feature=g-vrec&context=G27d85efRVAAAAAAAACA--[[User:Bravo6|Bravo6]] 01:26, 19 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I edited the pistols page.The HK45T definitely appears as the 45T.I saw it in the new Guerilla Mode trailer/Preview--[[User:Bravo6|Bravo6]] 13:36, 29 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Is the assumption of the HK45 just based on the icon and name, because the icon definitnely looks like an FNP-45 to me and they could have just taken the 45 out of FNP-45 and slapped on a T to signify the threaded barrel. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 19:54, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Pre-Order Bonus Guns ==<br />
GameStop is advertising a Mark 14 Mod 0 EBR and an "AK-47" that looks pretty much exactly like the AK-200 already listed on the page (likely the same weapon) as pre-order bonuses [http://www.gamestop.com/collection/ghost-recon-future-soldier]. Additionally, an IGN advertisement for a bonus MP map showed a Ghost with what looks like an HK416 (not a 417, it had a 5.56-shaped mag) in his hands. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:36, 10 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, the weapon is correctly called as 'MK 14' (unlike [[Ghost Recon Online#Mk 14 Mod 0 Enhanced Battle Rifle|GRO]]). That's a rarity nowadays. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:10, 12 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Call_of_Duty_4:_Modern_Warfare&diff=545773Talk:Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare2012-04-12T13:02:47Z<p>Masterius: /* Not an AK-47 */</p>
<hr />
<div>=Knives=<br />
<br />
== Main Knife ==<br />
<br />
This is main melee knife used in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. The knife attack always kills an enemy in one slash or stab. In Old School multiplayer matches, however, two knife attacks are required to kill an enemy player at full health. This two-hit-kill knifing also applies when double health is applied on Private Matches. It is used by all the factions and moves very fast.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Knife_4.png|thumb|none|400px|The main Knife In-Game]]<br />
<br />
= Discussion =<br />
<br />
<br />
Ah, goddamnit. I wanted to do this.<br />
Well, maybe i can make it up to IMFDB standards sometime, just '''DON'T''' do Half-Life 2. - [[User:Flying Dane|Flying Dane]]<br />
<br />
<br />
==MP5==<br />
This is not an MP5A3/SD as previously suggested, as it has a flat sided receiver with pictogram markings instead of the S-E-F markings on the A3.<br />
<br />
Wrong, It's an MP5N/SDN, it doesn't have the 4th selector option.<br />
<br />
:Please, keep the commentary on the discussion page. At any rate, I added a capture with a clearer view of the selector and its lack of a fourth position. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Screenshots==<br />
I have a lot of shots for the page and will upload them tommorow. -GM<br />
<br />
I've got a crapload of good real pictures for a lot of the guns, but I don't have any clue as to how to upload them, so, for anyone that can, email me at r1c0ch37@gmail.com<br />
<br />
<br />
== You know what would have been better? ==<br />
<br />
I kinda wished the creators of this game made more guns for us to use. There are so many modern firearms at least they could put in the multiplayer. Like the G36 carrying handle instead of the rail, H&K machineguns, H&K grenade launchers, a full auto M16 in the multiplayer, the option to put every accessory on your primary, like sights, suppressor, and grenade launcher all in one instead of just pick only one. I know they did that for balance, but screw balance. Let's see, what else? The UMP, Mac-10, Glocks (specificly the Glock 18), Drum magazines, AUG, Tavor, SA80/L85A1, L96A1, MP7A1. I know I'm starting to sound like I'm turning the gun choices of COD4 into Rainbow Six, but that's why I like that game a lot because it has SO MANY GUNS to pick from and the option of putting whatever you want. I want the ability to change firing modes, to add and take off suppressors. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: Not to mention having the actual front sight posts still present on optic-equipped M16s and M4s would have been nice. I realize they probably removed it to give better visibility, but still. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC) Spartan198<br />
<br />
::Firing selectors would have been nice. Full auto or nothing is kind of lame. - [[User:Gunmaster45|Gunmaster45]]<br />
<br />
:::According to gamers, the military doesn't use semi-automatic (sarcasm). [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 09:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Spartan198<br />
:Yet it's all modeled on semi. Or safe.-protoAuthor 01:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Well screw hardcore gamers. I have most of the Tom Clancy games and those you can select weapons to semi and auto and even some have bursts mode[[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 01:06,<br />
3 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::I agree completely with you. In most situations in-game, I seemingly always find myself tapping the trigger for single shots instead of firing bursts. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 07:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198<br />
<br />
i would have liked to have seen the L96A1 and or the AW50F, as these would have been awesome in cod, also the glock 18, SR-25, and i would have liked to do my own customising of weapons, like on the M16 on the modified version you lose the front sights which just look wrong.<br />
<br />
Is ok to put pics on this from other websites. [[User:Drjuki]]<br />
<br />
I want a goddamm regular FN FAL and a IMI Galil AR with the wood hand guards. They would be perfect in the hands of terrorists in the game. They already have the G3 why not a FN FAL?[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 18:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
i would have liked to customised the weapons myself<br />
<br />
In my opinion the worst choice of the Infinity Ward was the selection of the MP-44 as "final unlock": is older than the AK-47 and cannot be modified, excepted the selection of the camouiflage painting. Why call the game "Modern Warfare" if the (teorically) ultimate gun is also the oldest???<br />
[[User:Lone Soldier|Lone Soldier]] 03-12-2009<br />
<br />
I believe the mp44 aka sturm was put in there as an Easter Egg of sorts since this was the first Call of Duty to date that wasnt about WW2.<br />
<br />
== Desert Eagle ==<br />
<br />
what finishes do the Desert Eagles have in the game? IMI lists several variants http://www.magnumresearch.com/CustomFinishes.asp<br />
<br />
Just stainless steel, I think. But don't quote me. I never use it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 07:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198<br />
the game has chrome and titanium gold.<br />
<br />
Stainless steel, as well as gold once you reach level 55.<br />
<br />
The Desert Eagles don't come in stainless steel. It would be too goddamn shiny. It uses a chrome-plating finish. --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>'' 06:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==P90 comments.==<br />
whoever keeps deleting my edits bugger off, this gun is awesome it is easy to aim and has awesome stopping power, and to say it is weak and inaccurate is just plain rubbish, u would have to be a fool to fail to kill an oppo with this gun<br />
<br />
''Have at it, but remember - this is the last time I play nice.'' --[[User:Clutch|Clutch]] 19:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
this weapon is the fantastic it is very easy to aim it has good stopping power and at close range it is downright lethal<br />
<br />
Can't we all play nice?!?! [[User:Drjuki]]<br />
<br />
I stopped playing COD4 because of peoples bickering "Thats a noob gun" "you're camping" "that perk sucks"<br />
<br />
There is a crowd who all believe what perks everyoe should have and what weapons, Id love to see a game by their rules, it would be boring. So waiting a few minuites behid a corner is camping, and i'm kicked for it, but they can sit in a building with a siper level the whole match? Tehn there is the p90 debate. Let people who like it use it, do't start telling them there a noob and being unfair.<br />
<br />
Come on clutch! Don't be so evil on the kid.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 18:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Any weapon or perk combination you use to kill an opposing player is deemed "noobish". Anymore I just laugh their rants off and go on with the game. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198<br />
<br />
I think it's sad people (including myself) stop playing the very good multiplayer because of the other players who just ruin it with loud, abusive talking, silly arguments about trivial matters, and generally making it uncomfortable. [[User:Mcguinness]]<br />
<br />
<br />
the noobish comment is spot on as if u use something that the other gamers dont like noobish sod that i kill the lot of em, and the silly arguements comment is also right it gets down right annoying<br />
<br />
== No Browning M2? ==<br />
Why is there no Browning on the page? It was clearly seen in-game.<br />
<br />
umm i dont think glitching outside of the map counts unles your counting the one on the M1 ambrams -scarecrow<br />
<br />
:As long as it's in the game, it counts to be in the article. --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>'' 06:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Red Dot Sight ==<br />
The red dot sight on the M4 SOPMOD is a Sure Shot Reflex Sight, not a C-More. [[http://www.afmo.com/Sure_Shot_Reflex_Sight_p/217-00588.htm]] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 07:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Spartan198<br />
<br />
==The 1911 Griggs used looks more like a Kimber TLE stainless==<br />
<br />
About the Springfield 1911 in the game I also think it is a Springfield opposed to a Kimber Warrior because I have one and the grip is a lighter color plus it has a different magazine.<br />
<br />
umm its a stainless (silver colour) 1911 isnt it? where does it say on the page its a kimber? -scarecrow<br />
<br />
==Excerpt from Remington 700P==<br />
*''"Oddly, the M40A3 also seen in game is very much the same weapon, although in the game they have slightly different attributes."''<br />
<br />
I have to agree and disagree with this statement, as they can't be classified "as the same weapon", since the M40A3 has its own model number, designation, and role in the Marine Corps; and was modified from the R700P, one change being the finely rifled heavy barrel. However, both rifles, as mentioned before, are made from the Remington 700 model. I think this should be clarified a bit more clearly. Any thoughts? --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>'' 12:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Just quick, is the 700p the ltr model or not? Can you tell? [[User:Mcguinness]]<br />
<br />
== Bluey? ==<br />
I noticed that some M4's and M16's have "Bluey" on the side. Is there a reason for this? Or just something the designers put in?<br />
<br />
*I think it's "Blue 4," possibly to identify who the rifle belongs to in the squad. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 11:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
yea it says blue 4 on both a M4 and M16 -scarecrow<br />
<br />
== M4/M16 ==<br />
I added a little more information about how the gas block removal on an M4/M16 would effect the firearm. It is true that is the gas block is removed that the next round will not chamber automatically. the bolt would have to be racked to load a new round. I just thought I'd add that information to the page. It can be removed if desired. [[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]<br />
<br />
INCORRECT ^<br />
<br />
Though you cannot see it, most likely the standard front sight gas block has been replaced whit anyone of the readily available low-profile gas blocks and most likely covered by the rail system or fore-grip.<br />
<br />
Thank you...some one realized that it was still there. please remove the text stating it is not there from the main page -supertoaster<br />
<br />
== M4 Barrel ==<br />
If anyone's still looking at this page, does it look to you like the M4 has a 16" barrel? It does to me. A perfectly straight 16" barrel (no M203 cuts) and the old style M4 stock. I believe that makes it exactly the same as the C8, which was mentioned as being what the SAS really use, so maybe the M4 in this game is really a C8. If anyone can counter this feel free.<br />
<br />
You're right about the barrel, I think, but the C8 has a 14.5", not a 16". Furthermore, if you look at the rifle without any optics, it has an A2 style rear sight, while the C8's is A1 style.<br />
<br />
The barrel looks longer because the front sight/gas block is removed when equipped with optics. If you take into account the length of the front sight, the barrel evens out at around 14.5 inches. The "standard" C8 has a 14.5 inch A1 profile barrel, but the C8FTHB (the version used by SAS under the designation L119A1) has a 16.1 inch barrel that bulges out where the M203 step is on an M4 barrel. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The L119A1's the SFW, not the FTHB. Although in practice there's probably not much difference. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 20:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Oh right, I forgot about the front sight being removed. Since you never have a carry handle in the SAS missions I wasn't counting that, and I was thinking SFW when I said C8.<br />
<br />
Looks like the FTHB to me. L119A1 - [http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/images/M4/C8andAG36.jpg] C8FTHB - [http://www.casr.ca/101-smallarm-1-c8fthb-rifle.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:51, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The only difference is that the SFW has a stronger front sight to use the HK AG-C/L17A1 grenade launcher.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 09:29, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Why would a stronger front sight be needed when the AG-C is RIS-mounted? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:44, 25 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==The 1911 in-game==<br />
<br />
The article is full of incorrect information. The MEU (SOC) pistol does have novak sights and a match grade trigger nowadays, and a Springfield Loaded model has front cocking serrations which the 1911 ingame does not. I don't see how it's anymore a Springfield Loaded than the other models the article lists it as not being. It seems obvious it's not any specific model of a 1911 but I'd say it's closer to the MEU (SOC) pistol than anything else. The MEU (SOC) pistol even uses desert tan gunner grips now that look just like the ones in the game. <br />
<br />
<br />
Not that I disagree that the Springfield Armory Professional 1911 is the 1911 model in-game, but I think that there ''is'' a possibility that it might be a Nighthawk Custom Enforcer Series or GRP 1911. Why? Because the armed forces would likely use higher-ended companies like Nighthawk. Anyway, just a possibility. Any thoughts?<br />
<br />
LINKS:<br />
<br />
* http://www.nighthawktactical.com/The_Enforcer.html<br />
<br />
* http://www.nighthawktactical.com/GRP.html<br />
<br />
--[[User:Blemo]] 22:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
That's a negative. The Nighthawk Enforcer is basically a Kimber Warrior without the rail, and the rail wasn't the only thing that made the Kimber Warrior a misidentification. The Novak sights are different, and it has a flat top strap across the slide. As far as the military using "higher end companies" They usually buy what's most cost effective and not necessarily best quality, and since Nighthawk Custom makes.... custom firearms, I doubt they'd have a contract that would be cheap, or at least cheaper than competitors. It's still a Professional. --[[User:Yournamehere|Yournamehere]] 02:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I see. --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>'' 06:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It definitly has those grips though, that was the first thing I noticed. It might not be an Enforcer, but it has the same grips.<br />
Here (in tan):<br />
<br />
link: http://www.nighthawkcustom.com/detail.aspx?ID=133#<br />
<br />
Oh and thanks Blemo for bringing this up anyway because I've been trying to put together an airsoft replica of this 1911 for a while, and now I've finally got those damn grips, couldn't find 'em anywhere. I also put together the M4 SOPMOD the S.A.S. use in game as my primary, which makes me Captain Price :D<br />
<br />
EDIT: You guys think it could be this one, a Springfield Armory Loaded? Just add the grips I linked above, I'm pretty sure it's exactly the same otherwise.<br />
<br />
http://www.bullshooterssupply.com/store/images/springfield_armory_1911_a1_px9109lp.jpg<br />
<br />
EDIT 2: I used my not so amazing MS Paint skills to put this together for you guys (and me)<br />
<br />
[[Image:CaptainPriceSALoaded.JPG|thumb]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It could be a customized Colt since the front sight does not seem to dovetailed into the slide--[[User:Jan|Jan]] 22:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for the MS Paint image, Alex. =] Sadly, I'd hate to burst your bubble and say that the ejection port should not be as "shiny" as seen in this image. Plus, the coloration of the slide and frame should be darker. (although it may just be the lighting). --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>'' 06:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I know, but the barrel, bushing, and trigger are some kind of "silver", whether it be stainless, chrome, nickel-plated, though I'd say stainless the point is those parts are "silver" [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
although more likely for Special Ops to be using Nighthawk's i dont think the designers at infinity ward no what they are. and on the topic of it possibly being an Enforcer model. All Nighthawks have Novak Sights besides the Dominator. and the Grips are easily replacable. so it could be any model from the GRP to the Enforcer to the Talon. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 23:14, 9 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Desert Eagles hammer down? ==<br />
<br />
Isn't the Desert Eagles hammer incorrectly down?<br />
<br />
Yes but so is the 1911's, and the rest once they've been fired. In the Modern Warfare universe all guns are double action only I guess. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
== M4 In-Game For Airsofters (Or Real Steel Guys Too I Guess) ==<br />
<br />
As with I'm sure a number of other people on this site, I airsoft. =D I've been working on a Captain Price kit for a little while, who, as you know, uses an M4 SOPMOD/Grenadier. The reason he uses both is because they're the same gun with and without the suppressor, for the sneaky and not sneaky parts. (And different optics, but his gun is probably supposed to have the same optics the whole time, I'd bet IW didn't want to make a different gun just for him, as most people wouldn't notice.) Because finding EVERYTHING to put together his M4 was a big pain, I'm going to put a list of parts here for anyone wanting to make the M4 and its versions in-game. This would also work for a real one too I would think, at least mostly. This is assuming the base gun is a normal, generic M4A1.<br />
<br />
M4A1 "multiplayer":<br />
*16" HBAR (no grooves) barrel<br />
*Old style stock<br />
*RAS<br />
*Vertical foregrip<br />
(Please note this one can't be made using an electric airsoft M4, well, it can, but there'll be nowhere to put a battery. You will need a gas airsoft one or a real steel one.)<br />
<br />
M4A1 "normal":<br />
*16" HBAR (no grooves) barrel<br />
*Old style stock<br />
*RAS<br />
*Vertical foregrip<br />
*PEQ-2 (on the front left)<br />
*Tasco red dot scope<br />
*The smallest gas block you can find<br />
<br />
M4A1 Suppressed:<br />
*Same as the M4A1 "normal" except with a suppressor (go figure)<br />
<br />
M4A1 Grenadier:<br />
*16" HBAR (no grooves) barrel<br />
*Old style stock<br />
*RAS<br />
*M203 (9" rail mounted version)<br />
*M203 leaf sight (on the front top)<br />
*PEQ-2 (on the front left)<br />
*EOTech 552 holosight<br />
*The smallest gas block you can find<br />
<br />
M4A1 SOPMOD:<br />
*Same as the M4 Grenadier except with a suppressor, and a Tasco QP22 reflex sight replacing the EOTech 552<br />
<br />
For Captain Price's M4 I'm combining the Grenadier and SOPMOD by having a suppressor and an EOTech 552, seems like the easiest way to solve the problem.<br />
<br />
I hope this list helps whoever needs it. :)<br />
[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:54, 3 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The barrel on the M4 is 14.5". The missing FSP just makes it look longer. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As much as everyone seems to think that, try putting a piece of paper up to your screen with the edge down the centre of the barrel of a 14.5" M4, a real one would be good. Mark off the back of the front sight/front of the RAS/Handguard, and, without moving it, mark where the flash hider starts. This distance will be the same as the length of the RAS/Handguard. Do the same thing to the COD4 M4 Info Picture and you'll find the barrel's longer. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== AKS-74 ==<br />
<br />
Misinformation - as it is not portrayed in game. Removing<br />
<br />
How? It's pointed out that it is not in game and only on the poster. We have the Glock 17 on the Overkill and Last Stand perks, and the PPSh-41 that the statues hold, this isn't any different. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== G3A4 ==<br />
Someone commented that this was an HK91 due to the lack of a paddle release on the magazine. Here's a picture of a player reloading it:<br />
[[Image:G3-CoD4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
I don't see much here so what do you guys think? - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 16:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Don't see one, look at the create a class picture, no paddle release there either. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 00:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Well the reload animation acts like it DOES have a paddle release, so it supposed to be a G3A4 but the animation forgot about it, just like the trigger and guard for the M203 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Seems like a HK91 to me.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 15:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
[[Image:COD4 - G3 proof.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] 20:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I saw that it is a HK91 even without looking at Milkovich's proof image. Missing paddle release can be seen on the image with tha reload on the page. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:01, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The Javelin sight ==<br />
<br />
I posted this on the CoD wiki initially, but only on a talk page since they don't feature RL weapon info. When you're looking through the Javelin's sight, the display behaves...oddly. [http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:BogPar9_3.jpg The light on at the bottom] is supposed to be red and indicates "missile BIT failure," according to the [http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-22-37/chap2.htm field manual]. The red CLU BIT failure light comes on when it's locking on, and the amber "missile not ready" flashes just before you fire. I'm not sure if this is just normal behaviour or the FM on GlobalSecurity is wrong (I'd defer to anyone who's actually used one of these things for that) or if they just had lights come on at random for visual appeal. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 20:24, 5 March 2011 (MSK)<br />
<br />
== The M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
From Hitman: Contracts Talk page: "HOW the hell can the M4 in COD4:MW be an M4 if it has a 16" non-stepped barrel? I say that is an AR-15A3 with a full auto lower, if something like that can exist" (Stated by bozitojugg3rn4ut)<br />
<br />
Does anyone else agree? I do. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:34, 24 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm thinking the AR-15A3 is the most likely, but at any rate, here are the differences between the COD4 M4A1 a real M4A1. 16" heavy barrel (non-stepped), M16A1 flash hider, original M4 stock, M16A1 pistol grip (in 3rd person, can't see it in 1st), and a KAC RIS. Also, being a civilian gun could explain why the selector is set to semi. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:10, 24 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::But the M4A1 in MW2 and MW3 have their selector switches set to semi too. :\ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 22:02, 24 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Yeah... but there were so many other things in those games I just call that lazy. AUG with no rear sight... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:41, 24 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Which game? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:12, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::MW2's AUG has no rear sight, an aftermarket rail-mounted front sight, and a 30 round magazine that holds 42 rounds. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:02, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Aw, okay. Never played MW2 so I wouldn't know. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:42, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Don't, it will make you depressed :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:14, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Never planed too. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 22:29, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::This site's MW2 page has pics, they're enough [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:13, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
* Looks like this thread died... Bye Bye Thread. (P.S.: I still say that let's change it to AR-15A3. Will do it tomorrow if no one comes up with a good reason not to.) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 15:20, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
although not a solid reason i would just keep it. its not a big deal but for any onlookers there not going to understand it [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 20:11, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Or, they could learn what an AR-15A3 is :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:38, 3 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
So am I the only one willing to write the barrel off as a modelling error and the rest as being due to the low-polygon third person model? [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 09:46, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:If a modelling error makes one gun into another, then we cover it as the one the error made it into. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, I've always insisted that the M4 in-game IS an M4 rather any other M16-based weapon, but I guess I was wrong and looking on the small details, it's a civilian AR-15A3. BTW, if talking about accuracies, have you noticed that the M203 mounted on the, eventually AR-15A3 :P, is actually the A2 version used for the M16A4, rather the A1? (noticed by the rail). I guess it ought be changed too :) --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:49, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Although if it was a 14-inch barrel I could almost argue it's a C8A1 fitted with an M4 carry handle. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 11:39, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
: Correction; [http://www.coltcanada.com/c8-page.htm C8A2] with M4A1 carry handle and M16A1 pistol grip; the A1 doesn't have the heavy barrel. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 12:58, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::If you measure the length of the rail system, and then the length of the barrel in front of the front sight of this "M4", you can tell for sure it has a 16 inch barrel. I'm still thinking it's supposed to be the [http://www.coltcanada.com/sfw-page.htm C8SFW], the barrel's straight instead of stepped, but still 16 inches, one of the few with a standard 16 inch barrel. And 90% of the time you see a picture of the SFW, it has a KAC RIS. Oh, and it IS what the SAS use in real life as well, makes it more likely. Wow, this has got the be one of the hardest guns to identify... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:43, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::I really think you are giving the devs too much credit here with the appropriateness of the C8SFW for the SAS, especially as they call it an M4. There are quite a few Colt variants that have a 16" barrel as standard, the carbine sporter and LE variants. These would also be much more prevalent in the US for the developers to get a look at to base their weapon off of. The only distinguishing features of the C8SFW is the profile of the barrel and rupper pad on the butt, both of which are absent from this weapon. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:21, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:You're forgetting the original style M4 stock, that's pretty important. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:49, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::That is literally a 2 second job to change, and as I said before the SFW has a chunky rubber pad on the butt, which the game gun doesn't. Unlike the gun we have pictured for the site, AR15A3s can also have the fiberlite stock [http://www.expertoutfitters.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=22_62&products_id=197]. All of this is assuming it is a Colt rifle at all, for example it is a match for a [http://www.fulton-armory.com/fariflecal556mmupruniversalprecisionrifle-3-2-2-1.aspx Fulton Armory Classic M4], but that really is opening up a can of worms for something that probably only has a 16" barrel due to poor scaling of the 3rd person model. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:13, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
I see your point, but a rubber stock pad is as much a part of the gun as rail mounted optics, it's really not. Let's just go with the AR-15A3. The 16" straight barrel and old style stock are the most notable features, and it has both. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:36, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Images ==<br />
<br />
I'm gonna bump the image sizes up to 600px, is that okay? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 22:03, 7 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Sounds fine to me :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:05, 7 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Inaccurate Recoil Info ==<br />
<br />
In the HK91 (G3) section the one photo says something along the lines that: ''Although firing a larger cartridge than the AK-47, the G3 is inaccurately depicted as having less recoil than the AK.'' The game is actually relatively correct that the G3 has less recoil than the AK, because the AK is a 6-7lb rifle firing full auto, and the G3 is a 10-12lb semi-automatic battle rifle firing a caliber (7.62x51 NATO) that really isn't that much more severe than the AK (7.62x39 Russian). --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:18, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Sounds right to me [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:22, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Actually AKs usually weigh 8 lbs (stamped steel) or 10 lbs (milled steel), G3s weigh 9 lbs (G3A3) or 10 lbs (G3A4), plus real G3s are semi & full-auto (the one in-game is a HK91) and most people say it has a good kick like any other 7.62 NATO rifle. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 17:05, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::A G3 still has more recoil than an AK-47. Although the G3A4 is heavier (only by one or two hundred grams when both are fully loaded thanks to the "sturdy" AK magazine), the NATO round has quite a bit more energy than the 7.62x39. Did a (very) quick calculation and came out a loaded G3 having approximately double the recoil kinetic energy of a loaded AK-47. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:17, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Mmmmm sorry it really doesn't. I have a Saiga .308, which in the way I have it configured, weighs 10lbs loaded. The Saiga 7.62x39, which weighs 7lbs loaded, recoils as much as or more than the .308. Also, there are other factors being left out here. For one, the G3 is roller delayed recoil operated, which soaks up about 80% of the recoil alone. The AK is gas piston operated which soaks up only about 60% of the recoil. Another factor is the bullet itself. .308 tends to just "shove" your shoulder, whereas a 7.62x39 delivers a quick punch. (If you have shot these calibers you know exactly what I'm talking about). Lastly, a G3 has an 18" barrel, which offers more velocity to the .308 cartridge than the 16" barrel does to the 7.62x39, therefore calculations on velocity/energy vs recoil won't be accurate because it isn't a direct comparison. (you would need to compare 16" to 16" barrels, and as a rule of thumb, every inch different from the published velocity of a certain ammo adds or subtracts 50 fps for every inch added or removed). --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 18:28, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::The only factors I took into account were the muzzle velocity of the particular firearms, the weight of the bullet, the weight of the gun, and Newton's third law. In order for the world not the fall apart, the G3 definitely recoils with more energy than an AK-47. The exact manner in which it transfers this energy is a different matter. I can't say definitely as haven't shot them back to back, but I would agree that a G3 is more ''comfortable'' than an AK-47, but if you were to lay them both on a frictionless table and pull the trigger, the G3 would slide backwards faster than an AK-47. I have also shot a G3 full auto, and it is pretty damn hard to stay on target. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:13, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::Theoretically, you would be right. However the roller delayed blowback system significantly slows down the cycling of the gun and requires much of the recoil to operate the bolt, thereby reducing '''felt''' recoil. Technically, yes the G3 does have more recoil, but because of the operating system, you don't feel it nearly as much as on an AK. Don't get me wrong, it's one heck of a gun to control, however because of the type of action, the type of caliber, rounds per minute, and so on, the recoil on a full auto AK will be much worse than a semi-auto G3. Are we all cleared up? Thanks --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 19:46, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::Maybe recoil is the wrong word here, the MP5 (in-game at least) has tons, but that's not what we mean. What we're talking about is muzzle climb, or vertical recoil, not factoring recoil back into your shoulder, because you don't really see that in a game. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:48, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
I still think the statement should be deleted because it obviously isn't true. Alex, I'm pretty sure it's safe to call muzzle climb "recoil" because in the game, that's what recoil is depicted as. If we want to switch out everything we talked about to muzzle climb, well it still would be wrong. In game, it's the same thing. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 19:58, 8 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:To be honest I haven't played the original Modern warfare, so have just looked up some videos of the G3 firing and it has ridiculously low recoil, its like a .22LR. Even if you click the mouse so fast it replicates full auto, there is zero muzzle climb. In real life, even if we are just talking about muzzle climb, in my experiencing a G3 firing on full auto has a lot more climb than an AK-47 firing on full auto. As for the operating systems absorbing recoil, I don't know where you are getting numbers like 80% from (so you think a G3 has 20% the recoil of a bolt action 7.62?) but no operating system can get rid of recoil energy (with the exception of turning negligible amounts of it into sound and heat) it will just change the way it is distributed over time. The bolt on an AK-47 is heavier due to the piston being attached, which meant that it might have a harder "kick" within the recoil when the bolt hits the rear, but the G3 has a possibly softer but much more sustained push, which will typically cause more muzzle climb. An analogy would be that you can push someone and punch someone with the same amount of energy, and they will be knocked over by the push but the punch will hurt more. I don't see anything untrue about the statement as it stands, but if it bothers you, get rid of the reference to the AK as it is unnecessary, and just change it to saying that the G3 has much lower recoil than it should creating zero muzzle climb even with rapid fire. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:31, 9 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::I totally get what your saying. Those numbers I got are approximations from strictly my observations only. I own AK's and have shot CETME's along with dozens of other firearms, sometimes back to back. In full auto, yes. I 100% agree with your statement (although it would probably be considerably less of you were shooting prone or from a bipod). As for shooting it out of a bolt action, yes, shooting .308 out of a bolt action is at least 2x as hard on your shoulder than if you shot it out of a semi-auto. It may not be 80%, but you have to remember the other factors than just the operating system.<br />
<br />
::I also agree that the depicted recoil may be less than it should be, however, given weight, operating system, caliber, caliber gunpowder burn type (pretty technical but it plays in), gun weight distribution, etc. its pretty safe to say that the semi auto G3 will have less recoil than the full auto AK. Maybe not as less recoil as depicted, but less recoil nonetheless. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 07:42, 9 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::I think the difference is that I'm comparing a full auto G3 to a full auto AK-47, whereas you are talking about a semi auto G3. I don't think this is a fair comparison though (which is suppose is a reason to get rid of or change the phrase in question, not because it is false but because it isn't a fair comparison), as any full auto rifle would have more perceived recoil and muzzle climb than a semi auto. A better comparison would be for a single shot from either gun, and in my opinion is that you would definitely feel more recoil from a single shot from a G3 as opposed to an AK-47. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:51, 9 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::In short, I'll agree with that. There are other things to be factored in and bla bla bla, but in short, you've got it. Glad we could fix this. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:50, 9 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Revising the page ==<br />
<br />
Can I be the one to get the screen shots, I want one less page afflicted with your (Evil Tim) obsession with the number 400. It may take me a while (need to get a new copy of the game (didn't own an actual copy) and I will be addicted to Skyrim and BF3 on top of that), hope you can wait Tim and ignore this page like how I ignore your pages (jk! >:P). I'm a merican, I do not like your 400px weapon images of "order" and you will never understand my "disorder", because you're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. <br> - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:02, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Well, look at this page ''now'' and you can see a demonstration of different image sizes making things look messy. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I'm not talking about the caps, screen caps '''should''' be 600/500px, I'm talking weapon images. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:46, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I mean the page is an excellent large-scale demonstration of how messy it looks when there's no standard image size. Incidentally, the way I took my caps for MW3 was to get it on Steam (which has a built in screencapping function by pressing F12) and then use Setpoint to stick F12 on one of my spare mouse buttons. I currently have a Steam copy of MW since I "pre-ordered" MW3 (by thirty minutes, and 6 hours ''after'' it was released in stores here) so I might have a head start :D [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:41, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Well, the only thing that needs to be replaced are the weapons screenshots. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 11:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Yeah, the only thing that needs to be changed is basically the entire page. I can't believe we still have Gamespot and IGN watermarks and a picture of someone's TV screen for the Desert Eagle. Also, Kenny, the images you're uploading are nice, but gameplay images are better than model viewer images. Let's try and build this page out of images of what the game looks like while someone's actually playing it. EDIT: There, that's a few uploaded just as a demonstration. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:53, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Just a note, you're going to have to be quick with this, this page is so incredibly horrible I'm fighting the urge to overhaul it immediately. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:45, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::I won't mess with it while you guys are changing it, but seriously, it's MacTavish. Mac. Not Mc. He is Scottish after all. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:33, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Must admit I hadn't checked the spelling. Nevermind, the series makes it clear the entire population of the British Isles are actually Scottish so maybe Soap is one of the English kind of Scottish. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:07, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Mac as opposed the Mc has nothing to do with whether he is Scottish or not. The voice actor is Scottish and his name is McKidd. Mc is just an abbreviation of Mac (used to be written as M'c) and is a personal preference thing. The thing about Mac being Scottish and Mc being Irish is a myth, you find both forms in both places. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:46, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::Good to know, I didn't mean to generalize. :/ Well, there's Soap and MacMillan who are Scottish, but Price, Gaz/Ghost/Wallcroft, and most of the other SAS members in this and MW3 are English if I remember correctly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:46, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::I've been told that in real life there are proportionally more Scots in the SAS than there should be. If you live in a country where the thistles are waist high and nobody's invented trousers, you're going to toughen up a bit I suppose. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:54, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::Hahahahaha very true :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:20, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::I would know, I have Scottish ancestry. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:12, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::::Cool :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:07, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Not an AK-47 ==<br />
<br />
The game gun is not based on an AK-47 as it has a stamped upper and lower receiver. However it lacks the AKM dimple, so my guess would be that it is actually based on a [[AK-47#Romanian_WASR|WASR-10]]. The rivets are in slightly the wrong place though, and it has a random plate stuck on the side behind the handguard so might be something else, but at the very least I think it should be labelled as an [[AKM]] variant. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:00, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:You know these guys, it's probably based on some Airsoft hybrid like the "AK-74U" was. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Just noticed as well that it has the AK-47 type front sight, so it is either based on something obscure, a custom, airsoft, or imagination. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:05, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::I think "most likely based on an Airsoft gun" is probably the best bet for the article. We know they do that, and it's vastly more likely than that they picked an obscure AK variant. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::I agree. Saying most likely based on an airsoft gun is best, if only to avoid confusing everybody :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:07, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Is it possible that "AK-74U" in [[Battlefield 2#AKS-74U|Battlefield 2]] was based on Airsoft hybrid too? [http://images.wikia.com/battlefield/images/1/1d/BF2_AK-74U.png Its image] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:02, 12 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Price is Price's grandson ==<br />
While I agree it was most likely a joke at first, as MW Price became such an important character and so well liked they must've felt they had to clear this up and someone from IW (from the model department no less) said that he is his grandson. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:56, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:It's never officially stated in the games themselves if they're even related, just an informal interview. Doesn't really dignify including it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::Okay :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:38, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Plus we know from Price surviving being shot in the head, Macmillan surviving a helicopter falling on him, Zakhaev being fine after having his arm blown off in the middle of nowhere, Petrenko surviving due to being handed a Russian flag and Ghost TOTALLY NOT BEING GAZ that death in the CoD universe works on the honour system. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:16, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::: When'd he get shot in the head? [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 17:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Fairly sure that was where Zakaev shot him at the end of 4. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 19:13, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAENNWtb0DU Nope], he shoots another similarly dressed guy in the head, Price is the one that slides the pistol over after this point. Price's fate is initially ambiguous, as you see a Russian soldier attempting CPR. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:20, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Yeah, that was Gaz that Zhakaev shot in the head, not Price. Also, not trying to ignite an argument about it, but having the same voice actor doesn't make Gaz and Ghost the same person. Going by that logic, Naomi Hunter and Emma Emmerich from the MGS franchise must be the same person because both were voiced by Jennifer Hale, and Resident Evil's Leon S. Kennedy and Specter the SEAL from the SOCOM games must be the same person because both were voiced by Paul Mercier. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:24, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::Well sure, but neither of those died only to be replaced by a character called ghost wearing a skull mask he never takes off. It's pretty obviously supposed to be a joke rather than him actually being undead Gaz, but still. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 19:50, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Undead Gaz sounds like something Treyarch would try. Anyway, I read the Ghost comic book series, and he has his own backstory. It's just weird they'd bring in Craig Fairbrass to do the role again, he has such a distinctive voice. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 22:21, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::He's also in MW3, voicing Wallcroft, who was in this :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== C8 Link Help :( ==<br />
I don't know how to link things to places part way down pages, so could someone fix the red C8 link in the AR-15A3 section? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:57, 9 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:The correct markup is PAGENAME#SECTIONNAME [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:28, 9 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Thanks :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:41, 9 February 2012 (CST)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Battlefield_3&diff=545172Talk:Battlefield 32012-04-11T08:13:01Z<p>Masterius: /* Going Rambo */</p>
<hr />
<div>See [[Talk:Battlefield 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
== Why am I not surprised? ==<br />
<br />
Part of me isn't too surprised that the CODMW3 article would be taken off the Work in Progress Status in a much shorter time than BF3's page. Personally I think MW3 committed a war crime with how atrocious the M16A4 looks both in the first person and 3rd person models of it. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:00, 16 November 2011<br />
<br />
:Just the M16? :/ Hell, the P99 is the only pistol where they didn't get something wrong. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:14, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It has more to do with the fact that MW3 makes more mistakes and therefore is far more fun to write about. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::My personal favourite screw up in MW3 has to be the Skorpion's scope rail mount, with the "MG36" as a close runner up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I still mad about the fact they suddenly decided that it'll better that the M4A1 will have a 20-round magazine rather than a 30-round magazine -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:05, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Lol good points all around. I'm not too knowledgeable on everything but I'm in the service and I use the M16A4 often. So it stuck out like a sore thumb the moment I picked up the rifle in the game that something was really freaking off about it. Like it wasn't already bad having 30 rounds come out of a 20 round mag. But bolt on rails to A2 Handguards? Really?! XDDD I don't know how accurate that P99 is, but it irks the hell out of me seeing it held one handed in the First Person Model. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:25 16 November 2011<br />
<br />
Ya know? It's funny that the "fact" they are using military advisers to make the game better in "tactics" and stuff (yeah, right), this military advisers or what ever, aren't aware of the way the developers model the weapons and doesn't 100% reassemble to the real life one's :/ I guess the developers tell them "We don't really give a damn about realism, just tell us how the hell modern warfare works"... Still, the guys of BF3 made a bit better, though it does have also many things unrealistic, like the fact Marines are using M16A3's instead of M16A4's, and some of them running with an M240 like it a was wooden gun. Sigh. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 02:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The thing about an advisor is that his job is to answer questions. It's up to the developers if they a) ask him the right questions and b) pay attention to his answers. I believe ''Star Trek's'' science advisors have publically complained that they're only asked for advice on what terminology to use and never on whether something is actually good science. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:15, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
One thing SP Campaign of BF3 proves is that BF3 shouldn't have SP Campaign in the first place. One would expect it to be more authentic, yet it takes approach of CoD: "We just put randomly weapons we have in MP whether or not they fit in". So suddenly we have Marines with M16A3s and M240Bs (instead of M16A4s and M240Gs), insurgents (exactly insurgents and not organized militia from pre-alpha trailers) with AK-74Ms and AEK-971s (instead of AK-47s / AKMs), Spetsnaz member Vladimir with 5.56 A-91 (despite Russian forces simply not using this caliber even for SF), etc. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:27, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Let's not forget that the protagonist of the game, Blackburn, during the interrogations scenes, you can see his name and branch tags that they're in white and straight rather than MARPAT and in an angle with the chest pockets. Also, one of the the guys in Blackburn's team, though I can't remember his exact name (the guy who carries M136 all the time), wears MultiCam OCP, still, rather than MARPAT uniform. Eventually, war games wouldn't be realistic as real life, even in the small parts. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:22, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Except my games (If I ever make games). :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 11:34, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Plus, they (Marines) get CAS from Little Birds. Apparently, to the game devs the terms 'US Army' and 'USMC' are interchangeable. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:50, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I don't recall the insurgents using AEK-971s in the Iran missions, usually it was a random stew of your typical AKS-74u, AK-74M (don't real militants from the former Soviet bloc use the more modern 5.45 AK-74 at times?), RPKs, and the KH2002. However, the terrorists with Solomon from later on in the story do use all this, and even more somewhat outlandish equipment. Also, since the page is incomplete, can you explain to me how you identify the Marine's M16 models as the A3 versions? During the campaign I recall Blackburn's M16 as being able to fire in fully automatic. (Except that one mission where you inexplicably jump off with an HK416) Also, didn't Vladimir use the AS VAL throughout the Spetsnaz missions? And although it's not top-notch realistic Ala ''The Hurt Locker'', I wouldn't exactly outright call it the CoD approach. I mean, just look at what they did with Black Ops. Pointing out every inaccuracy in that game is to the point of turning it into a drinking game. Long Fallen 17:49, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Other than that one HK416 Blackburn had, which was odd, if they worst things the Marines had were M16A3s instead of A4s and M240Bs instead of M240Gs, then I'm happy enough. And the PLR only had 74Ms, 74Us, and RPKs if I remember correctly, the later enemies had AEKs. All the weird guns were given to Kaffarov's private army, as he is an arms dealer. It's like complaining you see a few M1928s instead of M1A1s in a WWII movie. Black Ops.. is Black Ops, and MW3 had FADs in the hands of African militia... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:20, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe it is related to the "AKS-74U vs. UMP issue": in some of the videos of "Operation Swordbreaker", inside of the building, leading to anti-sniper position, one of the insurgents is certainly equipped with AEK-971, with others having AKS-74U and AK-74M (AK-74 would be correct for former Soviet bloc militant but not AK-74M unless he managed to scavenge it from Russian soldier). For M16A3, check one of the Marines on the way to bridge in the same mission. And while Kiril used the AS "Val", Vladimir used the 5.56 A-91. And yes, as Alex said, Black Ops... is Black Ops *sadface* --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:17, 17 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::You are right, that one insurgent always has an AEK, but that's an exception. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:31, 17 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Cod always screws up the guns<br />
:What does that have to do with Battlefield 3? [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:12, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sidearms ==<br />
<br />
Has anyone else noticed Campo carries ''two'' sidearms, one on his chest and one by his hip? Looks like two Glocks.<br />
<br />
[[Image:BF3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ten more and he'll be a Glockenspiel.]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:18, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I'm sorry, but that caption was just too good. On topic however, it seems as if the handgun holstered on his chest seems pretty low res to be made out. Could it be a designer oversight or something? - Long Fallen 17:21, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe they are copying Epps from [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], he nonsensically carries a pair of Glocks in the same way as well... --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Well, that's the Assault kit's chest, with the Glock and all, so they most likely gave him a leg holster and forgot about that one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:01, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's like in MW2 where the snipers carry unusable M1911. Although it is peculiar that the Marine in this game carries unusable Glock and not M9 or MEU(SOC). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:17, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== BTK Weapons ==<br />
<br />
Finally! http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg<br />
<br />
:MG36 and Jackhammer? Guess the XM8 and plasma rifle will be in the next DLC. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:30, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I guess that confirms that there will be no PLA Faction DLC *sadface* I still hope for EU Faction :|<br />
:Also confirmed that HK53 is back intact :)<br />
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Why do they choose to include the "HK" prefix in the HK53, but not on the M416? [[User:Santos|Santos]] 11:26, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I'll ask Demize why this HK is okay (and the HK21 in BF2). Actually, they hinted they might do more weapon DLCs later, so I'm expecting a "Back To Bad Company" pack with all three XM8s and other stuff. Also, not a plasma rifle, but I've always thought it'd be cool to see Halo guns in another game, the human ones. For those of you that don't know, they all make functional sense. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:48, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::lol yeah all those functional Spartan Lasers we have lying around. Though it would be cool to see an NTW-20 in a videogame. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:45, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::[http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle Have] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle1 you] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle2 said] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle3 NTW-20]? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:34, 12 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== RPK ==<br />
<br />
Incidentally, I need to check if the RPK-74 has a flash hider. If not, with wood furniture and a ribbed metal magazine, it's actually an RPK with a sight rail, not a -74 at all. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:10, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Maybe I didn't spend enough time using it, but I remember it having black furniture. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:44, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Checking my PS3 video captures it's very dark brown; more to the point, though, it's got that standard AK-style handguard with two holes through the middle (with a RIS foregrip sticking out the bottom, admittedly); the -M polymer handguard is a different shape and has ridges all along the top of the gas tube. <br />
<br />
::[[Image:Soviet RPK-74.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK-74 light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
::[[Image:rpk74m.jpg|thumb|none|601px|RPK-74M light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
::[[File:BF3-RPK-1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]<br />
<br />
::If it doesn't have a flash hider, I think that makes it an RPK. I thought I could see one there, but in my PS3 video it looks like it doesn't have one and the in-world and pickup models don't have one either. I was going to say "except the scope mount" but MPM's RPK image has one:<br />
<br />
::[[Image:RPK lmg.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK Light Machine Gun with 40 round magazine - 7.62x39mm]]<br />
<br />
::Is this normal? From what I'd read the scope bracket was an -M thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Thanks for clearing up the RPK differences, as for the scope rail, scopes are nice to have sometimes, I'm sure some of the older RPKs were fitted with scope mounts as aftermarket parts in real life. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:06, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::As the RPK in the game only has the bracket fitted when a sight is there, I would certainly put it in the "aftermarket" category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Oh right, just like the AKS-74U becomes an AKS-74UN when mounted with optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:47, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Just to assure you this ''does'' happen (it's so nice having a PS3 video of half the game to pull shots from): <br />
<br />
:[[Image:BF3-RPKForegrip.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
:RPK with inexplicable foregrip. I'd just forgotten they don't all have that. Also, is it just me or is the scope mounting screwed to the side of the dust cover rather than attached to a bracket? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Single Action Army ==<br />
<br />
Just letting you guys know, as stated on its page it is called Single Action Army on this site as there are so many nearly identical replicas calling it the more correct Colt 1873 might actually be wrong, and SAA is used as a catch-all term. However, just as we assume a full-size Glock is a 17 unless we can tell otherwise, we also assume a gun in a game is not a clone, unless we can tell otherwise. Therefore, it is assumed that the drawing of the SAA is the original Colt 1873, and should be named as such. This is just to avoid an edit war, or something. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M224 ==<br />
<br />
I don't know about Xbox, but on the PS3 the M224 definitely has an M7 baseplate in multiplayer. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:54, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yup, it has one on 360. Lol at the baseplate having a designation :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Just about everything in the military has a designation. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:10, 10 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Feel free to change it, I was going off it not having one in single. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:31, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Kaffarov's Private Army ==<br />
<br />
While I understand that Kaffarov is an arms dealer, it boggles my mind how so many times in fiction there are people who are able to procure such military spec equipment like the F2000, Mk.17 (SCAR-H), AEK-971, and so many others. Surely the companies and or countries that produce them don't freely sell them to whatever buyers there are? My question is how would people like Kaffarov even be able to avoid the system and acquire such equipment? I don't know if it has been answered elsewhere, or for obvious reasons '''hasn't''', but it's just something that I haven't been able to explain logically. -- Long Fallen 18:03, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Reminds me of [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Legionnaire Legionnaire] from [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company Battlefield: Bad Company]. And that guy paid his mercenaries in ''gold bars'', mind you. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Kaffarov... Makarov... Kaffarov... Makarov... Is it only me or does BF3 is trying to copy MW3 in many matters? :/ --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 23:29, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Um, what's so suspicious about Russian (or Russified) surname ending in -ev or -ov? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I'm not sure either, but it lets us have the cool guns people don't really use, so it gets a pass in my books. Also, those two names aren't really that similar, and the characters are nothing alike. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:12, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:To answer the question, no. Any customer who could afford top-drawer equipment would be dealing directly with the company that made it, the kinds of people who go to dodgy arms dealers want weapons that are simple enough to equip illiterate militiamen with, cheap enough to equip a ''lot'' of them with, and have widely available spare parts and ammunition. It's no longer the era when unpaid former Soviet commanders would empty entire arms depots onto the black market and flee to countries that don't have extradition treaties with Russia, and no longer the era when you could get a superpower to pony up a whole bunch of equipment and training just by saying you were fighting for / against communism. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I see, but I recall this story from a few years back -[http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/factory-tightens-security-after-gun-thefts-23226.html Stolen Five-seveNs from FNH factories] (I had no idea the P90 was a handgun xD) - And then there's this too -[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081112_worrying_signs_border_raids Mexican drug cartels being armed with P90s and Five-seveNs] So I still want to know, what are the likely chances of seeing terrorists with such equipment? I mean, these articles seem to bring it to light. (Sorry if I'm going off topic) -- Long Fallen 00:42, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::With Mexico it's a situation where a lot of the top-class armament is purchased in the United States and smuggled across the border; similar arrangements were used to smuggle arms to the IRA during The Troubles in Northern Ireland. That's the "buying directly from the supplier" kind of deal, and is usually done without a dealer acting as an intermediary (because the Cartels have enough money to do it themselves, or take the weapons in part payment for supplying product to drug dealers). Your typical Eastern Bloc / African arms dealer just buys up weapons somewhere a war is ending and ships them to where a war is still going on, because the buyers don't have the contacts, legitimacy or resources to do it by themselves. A lot of the guns these guys circulate have been involved in local conflicts for years or even decades.<br />
<br />
:::Top-end hardware typically comes from governments and organisations. Insurgents in Iraq didn't get top-of-the-line anti-tank weapons and training in making IEDs from some guy in the business of moving weapons, they got them from sympathisers in places like Iran. Alarmism about what ''kind'' of weapons terrorists have is pretty foolish anyway, since generally they prefer the instant, indiscriminate destruction of explosives to trying to shoot people with a gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, I see, thanks for enlightening me :) -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Whoever said "a lot of the top-class armament...blah blah Mexico... smuggled from US..." is rather wrong. The Mexican cartels who have P90s and M16s and etc western weaponry are getting it from the Mexican military and police, only a small percentage of the guns near the US border are actually smuggled in to Mexico from the US. The numbers seem higher because recently Mexico has been sending in stores of arms they have confiscated over the past X amount of years (that they know can be most likely traced to the US) to get traced at the same time. This leads to a overblown number that looks good on anti-firearms pamphlets. If you think about it a bit, what do you think would be easier and cheaper:<br />
<br />
1. Finding and paying someone to buy 10 semi-automatic guns in the US at ridiculous prices, risking him getting caught, losing your money, going through all the background checks, etc, then sneaking them over the border. Not to mention finding ammo.<br />
<br />
Or<br />
<br />
2a. Paying some guerrillas in some SA country x amount of dope to bring in a ship, container, truck, or plane full of 100s or 1000s of eastern bloc or former US military weaponry, that is most likely going to be fully automatic. Plus large quantities of ammo for said weaponry.<br />
<br />
2b. Stealing or buying from a corrupt military/ police official brand new weaponry.<br />
<br />
The "X% of guns in Mexico are from the US" myth is a fallacy created by the Mexican and US govts and heavily compounded by the ATF smuggling them themselves or letting them walk, and the FBI for not laying out the specifics of the stats. Then the subsequent (ratings improving) media hype compounds it further.<br />
<br />
Not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is greatly exaggerated.<br />
<br />
Now as for how someone like Kaffarov would get the weaponry, its pretty simple. 1. Start a (possibly dummy) corporation (possibly in a different country). 2. Buy from a manufacturer saying they are intended for "security", or "testing", or hell, even arming your own "PMC". 3.Lock and load. How do you think PMCs such as Xe (Blackwater), AirScan, Aegis DS, etc.. get their new "HSLD" weaponry? Most international arms trafficking treaties do not extend to selling firearms to private entities in the same way they do governments.<br />
Respectfully, the (somewhat intoxicated)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I wasn't saying it's the majority source, just the source of the more pricey / modern equipment. These people have supply networks that move ''tons'' of drugs across the border, they're not going to consider moving guns in the other direction a substantial risk; one would imagine their US buyers are probably the same people who buy their drugs, considering they're already going to be smuggling stuff back as payment and keeping their activities secret. Most of the weapons they get from the US aren't purchased legally (the big myth is they're bought legitimately from normal gun stores, SO WE MUST CLAMP DOWN ON THIS). Most of their stuff is indeed bought in from other sources, but weapons like the Barretts aren't going to be coming from just anywhere, and there ''is'' precedent from this happening in Northern Ireland where the IRA got a lot of their best weapons from Irish expatriates in America.<br />
<br />
:As for Kaffarov, the main problem with the mythical top-end arms dealer is who he's supposed to sell these rare weapons on to, not how he'd get them himself. Sure, if it's ''just'' equipment for his private troops he might splash out, but he wouldn't be wholesaling in exotic arms with rare ammo and parts because nobody would buy them, plus he'd have problems with the companies he's buying from wondering why their weapons are suddenly turning up in conflict zones in the exact quantity they're selling them to his shell company. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I know who! He's obviously selling to the Russian Army, Brazilian and African militants, and Makarov's terrorists in MW2 and MW3! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:32, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
: From what I remember in the BF3 novel Kaffarov was a former GRU agent handling weapons and training with then political ally Iran, who got too deep in the local agendas and was probably compromised. IN the novel his weapons were less new (Uzis and shit), but I could totally buy that Kaffarov was still connected enough to Russia's arms trade that he could probably weasel crates of AEK971s out of them without too much trouble. Supposedly that's how Solomon got the suitcase nukes in the first place anyway, off Kaffarov. (as a note the book's plot is little more coherent than the game, probably worth the pickup if you're trying to dissect the game's narrative.)--[[User:Toadie|Toadie]] 04:17, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:This entire discussion is clearly a case of thinking way harder about what Kaffarov is hypothetically capable of procuring for his men than DICE did while they were working on the game. As for the whole "Mexico Gun Smuggling Debate" - try reading some academic reports on the subject before claiming that the statistics were cooked up ([http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%206-%20U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico,%20New%20Data%20and%20Insights%20Illuminate%20Key%20Trends%20and%20Challenges.pdf Wilson Centre: U.S Firearms Trafficking to Mexico] is a long read, but it does illuminate the various ways guns are smuggled and how they are interdicted) --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:41, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
well look at the Libyan civil war were both sides were able to get massive amounts of G-36s --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 20:38, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Most of the weapons such as Barretts, M16s, etc.. are coming from the Mexican military. As for the IRA in the 80s I know all about that, that was a different time. Many things happened back then that could not happen now. Plus the IRA stopped getting guns from the US when they realized it was easier to get them from places like Palestine and etc..<br />
With Libya... well HK is in deep right now for selling to some state police in Mexico that they shouldn't be selling to, it wouldn't surprise me if they sold to Libya and other places.<br />
And Markit, the report you linked to actually states in a couple places that the reports are skewed by many factors.<br />
This can state the facts better than I can: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/90PercentMyth.pdf<br />
-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 00:57, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:There was also an incident during the Georgia-Russia war where Georgian SF were seen with G36s that they previously weren't known to have. HK weapons are turning up in all kinds of strange places. :S [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:@Ranger01 - There's no verifiable proof that all those high-end weapons are coming solely from Mexican law enforcement - last time I checked, they could get better weapons than the FN PS90s, Romanian WASR clones, MAK-90s, AR-15 clones with the post-ban features, SKS rifles with Tapco furniture etc. that have been turning up in seizures of cartel arsenals. I know that the 90% statistic was erroneous, but I also do not believe that the percentage is only 12% according to your report (extrapolating only from serial numbers is faulty in itself when criminals usually take measures to remove/modify them). Besides, the "most deadliest weapons come from Central America" does not equal "most of the weapons come from Central America", which seems to be the tack that your article is taking. Also erroneous is the claim that Mexican military personnel are defecting and taking "American-made" weapons with them - the "150,000" figure was for desertions (which take place for any number of reasons in a conscription-based system) and most soldiers are armed with Mexican-produced versions of H&K weapons.<br />
<br />
::On an additional note, the G36s that were seen in Libya were likely a gray market sale - a firm buys the weapons with the end user certificate for one country, ships them there, then transfers them to the actual destination. A more controversial story would be that FN directly sold several hundred FN 2000s, FN 303s and P90s to Libya in 2009-2010. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 18:32, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Politics aside, F2000s would be ''great'' for a desert country; they're almost airtight. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:22, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Well Saudi Arabia did adopt the F2000 as their standard rifle. -- Long Fallen 21:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Hmm, didn't know that. As probably most of us are, I haven't had hands on on most of these, but am well read on them, and the F2000 would be one of my first choices of assault rifle if I had a country/army :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:51, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Now it's just a matter or wondering if they'll ever get around to using them... Sad is the day when hundreds of beautiful F2000s sit untouched in Arabian armories, gathering up dust. It's enough to bring a tear to any IMFDB user's eye xD -- Long Fallen 02:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Researchers point to '''Heckler & Koch G3A3''' being replaced with '''Steyr AUG''' in Saudi Arabian Army[http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_standard_infantry_rifle_for_saudi_arabian_army][http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110305182603AA3EBn4] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::So the SA National Guard bought the 55,000 F2000s... but the AUG was on issue? Did it replace the AUG? The standard rifle is the G3A3 as of now? A lot of this information feels so outdated. -- Long Fallen 16:19, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Saudi Arabian National Guard is separate from Saudi Arabian Army. An analogy would be 'Waffen-SS' (SANG) and 'Wehrmacht' (SAA)[http://www.dnipogo.org/fcs/comments/c424.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:08, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Blackburn from BHD ?? ==<br />
<br />
Go see the Colt M4 section and the M4 series below it is said that Black burn holds M4 quite often. I would like to ask is this Blackburn any how related to Todd Blackburn from Black Hawk Down, the Ranger who fell from the Black Hawk chopper? - [[S9771773G]] 09:47, 20 November 2011 (GMT)<br />
<br />
:I imagine it's just a coincidence, Blackburn is a "heroic" surname like Carver or Slater or whatever. I'd have thought if they were referencing Black Hawk Down they'd have named him after someone like Shughart or Gordon, really. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Doubt it. 'Battlefield 3' is unrelated to 'Black Hawk Down', plus, Todd Blackburn is Army Ranger while Henry Blackburn is Marine Recon. Proper analogy would be Patterson's from 'Medal of Honor' series. Both are in Army and [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/Jim_Patterson one] is actually the grandson of [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/James_Steven_Patterson another]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:19, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:'''P.S.''' Although, this would explain the appearance of Little Birds...<br />
<br />
::There's also the fact that Todd Blackburn is a real person while Henry Blackburn is a fictional one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:14, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::True, there is even a page on [http://www.aweekendofheroes.com/vips/todd-blackburn.php Todd Blackburn]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::From the link posted by Masterius: "In reality, it is not known why Blackburn lost his grip on the rope and is generally assumed that his inexperience led to his fall ('''However, Master Sergeant Matt Eversmann states that around the time when Blackburn fell, the UH60 canted slightly, and had to put his hand down to stay upright'''. The ranger that roped in after Blackburn also swears that he had grabbed the rope.) Additionally, the film incorrectly portrays Blackburn as a new arrival to Somalia, when in reality he had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company."<br />
::::Um... why would Matt Eversmann have any trouble staying upright in said canting helicopter ''when he was in a Humvee on the ground''? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::[http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/nov16/default16.asp Because he was, in fact, in a Blackhawk?] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 15:00, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::'''P.S.''' ^ Oh, the age there is said to be 18, and "just months out of a Florida high school", instead of 20, and "had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company". So which of the descriptions is the correct one?<br />
<br />
::::::They'd said on the DVD commentary as well as in the History Channel documentary about the raid that Eversmann was with the convoy the whole time. Guess they didn't have their facts straight. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::He was the leader of Chalk Four as shown in the film and was inserted by Black Hawk, callsign Super 67. He didn't go to the crash site as shown in the film though, instead he was part of "The Lost Convoy" carrying the captured prisoners, think that is what you are thinking of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:36, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::An interesting thing I found about Todd Blackburn was that he was born on October 25, the same date that BF3 was released, maybe that date was selected on purpose by DICE? [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 19:34, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Now this is intriguing... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:01, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I can tell you without any doubts that BF3 has several [[Generation Kill]] references. For example:<br />
<br />
- The main protagonist is part of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion.<br />
<br />
- When driving towards Tehran in the humvees and complaining that they signed up for an ambush, the driver says "Frankly gentleman, I'm not hearing the aggression I'd like. Keep scanning". Which is a reference to the 5th episode "A Burning Dog" when the team leaders are preparing to clear out an ambush by a bridge.<br />
<br />
- When Henry Blackburn and Co. drives in a convoy to capture Kaffarov the arms dealers. Matkovic, the guy wearing MultiCam OCP and the AT4, was sleeping on the convoy and when woken up he says "thirty four minutes... I've been asleep for thirty four minutes drinking a vanilla milkshake." Also a reference from the 5th episode A Burning Dog, when Ray Person wakes Brad Colbert to a team leader meeting, Brad responds "fifty six minutes. I've been asleep for fifty six minutes".<br />
<br />
[[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:00, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Not to mention the character named Chaffin. There's more, I'll have to play it again to find them all.-protoAuthor 23:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M203 Dog tag ==<br />
<br />
I was watching my new unlocked dog tags on Battlelog, and saw that the 40mm GL proficiency Dog tag has an M203 in the background.<br />
Should it be added to the list of weapons appearing in the game?<br />
<br />
http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/dogtags/lb/dtb094.png?v=1628729 <br />
<br />
[[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yes it should, like the SAA. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:29, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, though I would prefer these as full screenshots if possible (ie someone unlocking / viewing them), I never like pages full of different aspect ratios and weird tiny images. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Well since we're mentioning weapons appearing on dog tags but not the actual game for usage, the USAS-12 proficiency dog tag has a SPAS-12 silhouette for some reason. It was probably directly ported from Bad Company 2 given how it looks. -- Long Fallen 17:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Quite a number are, the SCAR-H is a SCAR-L. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::It actually peeves me that many of the assault rifle proficiency dog tags use the icons for the Bad Company 2 models, like most of the assault rifles equipped with grenade launchers. Especially the F2000 one, which isn't even possible to have an underslung grenade launcher, let alone the EGLM pictured on it. :P -- Long Fallen 21:05, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::You'd be wrong about the F2000 not being able to take a grenade launcher.<br />
<br />
:::[[Image:Fn f2000 3.jpg|thumb|none|500px|FN F2000 - 5.56x45mm NATO with [[FN EGLM|FN GL1]] - 40mm]]<br />
<br />
:::[[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:38, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, sorry, I should've made it clear that while the dog tag shows off the EGLM, you can't mount any kind of grenade launcher to the F2000 itself to use. -- Long Fallen 00:42, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::You mean ''in the game''. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Going Rambo ==<br />
<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMcM7OpC2dI&hd=1<br />
<br />
Just how realistic is it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I think they should implement an overheating system for all the light machineguns. Just like in Battlefield 2. [[User:Santos|Santos]] 06:33, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Barrel changes would be more interesting, I think. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:32, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::And then there will be people complaining that Battlefield is becoming simulator. Rather odd, since magazine system and overheating system were part of the core Battlefield games since the beginning... Sigh, Bad Company... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:52, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
More funny stuff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxsbTjPe2fs&hd=1 --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:21, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
More ordinary stuff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUpUFwV8fM8&hd=1 --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 11 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Back to Karkand ==<br />
<br />
There's an expansion pack coming out in December, and it's going to have ten new guns and four new vehicles.<br />
<br />
<br />
Here's a list of the weapons that I can absolutely confirm from seeing in the kill-feed in the trailers:<br />
<br />
MG36 with a top rail instead of the carrying handle/optics<br />
<br />
L85A2<br />
<br />
QBZ-95B<br />
<br />
QBU-88<br />
<br />
FAMAS (Looks to be the Felin version)<br />
<br />
There also looks to be some sort of Kalashnikov style weapon, but it's not shown clearly enough for me to recognize.<br />
<br />
<br />
Here are the trailers if you feel like playing Where's Waldo:<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=TyN_Zjw4l-s Overall Trailer]<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjTmieRMKjo Karkand Trailer]<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg Oman Trailer]<br />
<br />
<br />
Also of note, I have the PC version and just about all the weapons unlocked. I might upload screenshots if I get the chance.<br />
--[[User:AchingScaphoid|AchingScaphoid]] 08:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Unless they've got the screenshot feature working now, you'll need FRAPS to get screenshots. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:20, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:There are 2 AK variants in the first trailer you posted, I think the first is an [[AKM]], second is the same [[AKS-74U]] with the incorrect milled receiver as seen in the main game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:37, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The L85 is in the first trailer, although very briefly. 0.37, there's an L85. Old plastic handguard, RIS instead of the 19mm rail. No idea on the optic, other than it not being a SUSAT. --[[User:Spanner|Spanner]]<br />
<br />
::I think it might be an Elcan of some sort but not sure. The newest modification to the L85A2 replaces the old rail with a MIL-STD-1913 rail and is fitted with an Elcan Spectre with a piggybacked CCO. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I've also seen real L85s with ACOGs, so using that could be authentic for optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:13, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::An ACOG on a MIL-STD-1913 would be incorrect though. British ACOGs have a proprietary mount for the original 19mm rail. Any gun that is fitted with the new rail will be using the ELCAN. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Indeed:<br />
:::::[http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/files/BEMIL069/upload/2008/02/2_acog.jpg L85A2 with ACOG on mount]<br />
:::::[http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee252/TarnishUK/SpecterOS4x.jpg L85A2 with Specter on rail]<br />
:::::--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:41, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I added them to the page, feel free to expand them. This picture was on the Blog a few weeks back, it shows all 10 weapons:<br />
<br />
http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg<br />
<br />
[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:List of all weapons and attachments in BtK expansion:<br />
<br />
:http://mp1st.com/2011/11/30/the-complete-list-of-bf3-back-to-karkand-weapons-and-attachments-revealed/<br />
<br />
:--[[User:Wikinerd|Wikinerd]] 09:04, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Really, the best they could manage was photos of someone's TV? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I'm not too sure what to think of the Pancor Jackhammer being in this game, I mean, we've already got the USAS-12 as the automatic shotgun, if they wanted to add in another one, they could've just added in the AA-12. Anyone kinda with me on this? - Long Fallen 14:20, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not a fan of automatic shotguns anyway, since they, technically, overshadow the semi-automatic ones (because of selective fire). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::The USAS-12 has competition with the Jackhammer, I haven't unlocked it yet but I remember picking up a kit with the Jackhammer and it was like using a slightly lower capacity DAO-12 with it's 6+1 rounds but with automatic fire rate. This video shows some gameplay, extended mags give it 13+1 magazine capacity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q95ICdl9fsE&feature=related It's apparently "slower than the USAS" from what little experience I've had with it and from people I've asked about it [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MG36 ==<br />
I know that there were only 100 or so MG36s made, but isn't a standard G36 with a bipod foregrip and a double drum mag exactly the same thing? I get that if there's one in a movie it will actually be a G36 with bipod and drum added, but in a game can't it be called an MG36 since it didn't start as something else? Also, it IS an MG, not an AR, unless the RPK, M27, and QBB-95 are ARs too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:An MG36 has a bipod handguard, C-mag, ''and'' a heavy barrel and reinforced action. This, like basically every other MG36 that has appeared in anything, is based on a standard G36 with a bipod and drum, as the Bundrswehr use. I don't think there's even a specific name for the configuration, but it is ''not'' called MG36. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Oh okay, but would the heavy barrel look any different externally? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:11, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::I believe it's mostly internal. However, IIRC the MG36 was rejected the same year the MIL-STD-1913 standard was drawn up, so an "MG36" with a flat-top rail would have to be a G36 or an after the fact modification of an MG36, and speculating a gun that isn't real ''must'' be modified is trying a little too hard to cover up a simple naming error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Oh okay, well, if it had the standard carry handle I'd say it should be "MG36", but seeing as it has the "C" one, it's a G36 with a bipod, C-Mag, and G36C rail. To be fair though, MG36 is a ''lot'' easier for the sake of the game. On DICE's part I mean. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:10, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Alex - According to G3Kurz on HKpro, the barrel OD is 30% thicker. http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-long-gun-talk/94949-wtk-mg36-barrel-question.html Evil Tim - Where did you hear that it had reinforced action? --[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 22:44, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== "Kaffarov" ==<br />
<br />
So, is this mission always buggy as hell, or did I just have a bad run screencapping it? As well as that weirdness with the Barrett I had guns inheriting the texture of the floor they were on top of (I have a lovely image of a linoleum QJY-88), some pictures of MP7s with their magazine against their front grip and their stock hovering in front of them at ninety degrees to the gun and every single USAS-12 in the level appearing on the ground with no magazine. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:That always seems to happen with USASs and MP7s, but please, please add the linoleum QJY-88 to the main page, just for laughs :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Also, I really didn't get the last level. Why would you hijack a train that was already going to where you want to go (thus drawing attention to yourself for no good reason), then randomly rig it to explode even though you've already got a nuke on board? And why was one man with a detonator standing in the same room as the explosives that detonator set off? And how did Blackburn know that trigger would set off the random bombs and not the nuke? I have questions, dammit. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:54, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::This is my explanation and I know there's several holes in it but bear with me, it makes slightly more sense than just a lack of general explanation. The hijacking of the train was probably a distraction whereby once they got off their intended stop with the nuke, they would send it hurtling somewhere else for the police and other emergency services to follow. This would have then given them an opportunity to get the nuke to Times Square undetected while the emergency services scrambled to stop the train wired with explosives. In terms of the detonator, the guy was probably the patsy to serve as a suicide bomber-type to ensure the distraction seemed like the real deal and to lay blame once again on the PLR rather than Solomon. Blackburn knew that the trigger wouldn't set off the nuke because nukes require specialised arming devices if I'm not mistaken and you can't use a normal detonator to blow it up. Just my explanation of the events. Feel free to lay waste to my over-active imagination that came up with this somewhat cockamamie fill-in to explain the plotholes in the last mission. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:25, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::The thing is the train was already ''going'' to Times Square, and detonating a nuke underground would create a sinkhole a large chunk of lower Manhattan would fall into; if anything it would be even worse than detonating it on the surface. Solomon could have just sat there alone with the thing in his lap on a timer or dead man's switch, the only purpose the hijacking ultimately served was to draw attention to the fact that something was up.<br />
<br />
::::Then again, this story also had my very favourite, the framing device of the protagonist describing the action. I always smile when I imagine how it's going during the actual level. "So then I ducked into cover. Looked up but didn't shoot. Reloaded. Aimed down my sights. Saw a guy ducking out so I fire twice and reloaded and then..." "Weren't we supposed to be on a time limit?" "One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seventh Amendment." "Ah, yes, the right to defence in the form of an average-length modern video game." [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Correct, the train was going to Times Square but perhaps it was not the last station? I'm not sure how the trains work in New York because I don't personally live there but it's possible that Times Square was a station on a longer line of stations where Solomon could have sent the police, ESU, FBI, Homeland Security and whatever government agencies to follow the train rigged with explosives. Creating a sinkhole does seem like a better idea but I think the purpose of blowing it in Times Square itself above ground was to send a message. The mushroom cloud that would be better seen from above ground would strike more fear, in my opinion but hey, that's just my two cents. <br />
<br />
:::::In terms of the framing device, I have to agree with the utter ridiculousness of the idea of Blackburn describing the action he performed when recalling every single detail from the playable level but it's far more plausible than Black Ops. Thinking of how Mason could describe every single detail of his action movie experience as well as the experience of the SR-71 Blackbird pilot just made my brain stop completely. Especially when he was extremely doped up and possibly tortured judging by the bloodstains on various parts of his clothing. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:59, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4D0-s8OsI&feature=related Believe me, an underground nuclear detonation is hard to mistake for anything else]. As for Blops, I always had the image of the guys questioning him picking up the bottle of truth serum and checking the expiry date when he started with the G11s and WA2000s. Or the whole THE NUMBERS thing just ending up with him forgetting his wife's birthday. "No! Reznov said it was tommorrow!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:11, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Holy wow. I know that's destructive and it's horrible to say this but that is indeed impressive. My sentiments exactly. However, they probably just went meh because they (as in the interrogators who were CIA) were probably using LSD as a truth serum as well as a mind control drug at the time. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 05:46, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
I just got this game (yay! I absolutely love it, even the singleplayer) and I was gonna get screenshots but I heard I need FRAPS. What is FRAPS and how do I get it? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:34, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It is a program that can record gameplays and you can also take screenshots with a hotkey if it is running in the background. It has a freeware version. I think in the free version it can only save images in BMP, but u can convert them easily. Get if from here: www.fraps.com. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The free version watermarks videos, not sure if it does the same with screenshots. You're best off saving in BMP since the JPEG captures are pretty abysmal quality with lots of artifacting. Give me a few days first, though, I have fifteen hundred images of the singleplayer I need to sort through. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:29, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I just need screenshots and I have Photoshop CS4. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Then yeah, http://www.fraps.com/ to download the free version. Wikipedia says it doesn't watermark screenshots even on the free version, just be sure you have plenty of HD space since a 1920x1080 BMP weighs 3-6 megabytes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:05, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::596 GB. :B - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:49, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::: I currently use FRAPS myself. It does not watermark screenshots. Haven't tried getting videos yet. Anyways, the race is on to see who can put up pictures first.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 14:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I will be uploading a lot of great screenshots for the page tomorrow, should I add pics of the iron sights or just ones of interest? (ie, misaligned sights, the M9's correct sights, the MEU's tritium sights, etc.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:45, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, I'm in favour of having ironsight pictures on all video game pages, since they're so often missaligned, or out of scale, as a lot of what we do here is point out flaws and educate (hopefully) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:06, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yay, more work. I need more weight to this. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:22, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Iron sights are fine as long as they're reasonably interesting and the article doesn't have too many weapons; this one should be ok. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:30, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== My God ==<br />
<br />
I am so glad with battlefield 3 and mainly dice the are actually listening to the community and something even better they are fixing incorrect guns.<br />
<br />
Ex:<br />
<br />
Tweaked the AN94 so its burst fire better conveys the real world advantage offered by this weapon.<br />
<br />
Added Single Shot to the AN94 as an available fire mode.<br />
<br />
Slightly increased the recoil on the M416 and removed the Burst Fire mode (this weapon incorrectly had burst fire, which was not authentic).<br />
<br />
from latest patch --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 19:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Oh! But HK416 is still called M416? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:13, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Wait, really? they removed burst from the 416 and added semi to the 94? Wow, cool! Those were the only fire mode errors too :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Well, aside from not being able to fire the spotting rifle on the SMAW. I still think it would be amusing to be able to shoot people with your 9mm tracer that shoots like a rocket. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::What? Oh, looked it up: "Each round consists of a special 9mm tracer bullet, crimped into a 7.62x51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet blank cartridge for propellant". That is the most WTF round I've ever heard of :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:41, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Alex, I don't suppose you could share the link with anyone reading this page? :) -- Long Fallen 14:17, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Oh right :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I found a more detailed look at the round here: http://cartridgecollectors.org/cmo/cmo05oct.htm [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I wonder if they're going to fix the "SVD" as well [[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:01, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Is that just for PC? 'Cause I'm on the PS3 and the HK416 still has a burst mode and the AN-94 still doesn't have semi-auto as a fire mode. Or is this for the campaign? I haven't played the campaign again in a while. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:28, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::With the new patch that came out for the upcoming DLC, Back to Karkand. The AN-94 got the single-shot fire-mode and the HK416 got the burst-fire mode removed. Confirmed on the PC [[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::On the PS3 here, AN-94 still has the automatic/burst selection as before; no semiautomatic fire. The HK416 also still has semi/burst/fire selection. - Long Fallen 23:18, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
:::Xbox still has the old AN 94 and M416 fire modes. Also if you use the AN 94 with iron sights and swap back and forth between your pistol, the front sight disappears on the Xbox. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:30, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::That change is in the next patch we're supposed to get, it takes longer for consoles. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:54, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Any idea of when that is? I just started using the AN 94 and love the two round burst but I'm hindered at long range because of the recoil and rate of fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:05, 26 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:No idea, it has to go through certification from MS/Sony and usually takes 2-3 weeks. Ish. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:51, 26 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Changing Descriptions in screenshots. ==<br />
<br />
If you take the screenshot, go ahead and put whatever you want in there. But if you're going to edit my words, do so only if there is a typo, misspell, incorrect information or bad grammar. Seriously, if you want to put your own words so badly, put your own damn screenshots up.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 00:58, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Your screenshot descriptions read like a filing cabinet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:40, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
Then like I said previously, put up your own damn screenshots--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 13:20, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:This is a wiki. The point of a wiki is collaborative editing. As stated in the [[Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#IMFDB_is_an_information_resource.2C_not_our_private_playground | Rules, Standards and Principles]], ''"IMFDB is an information resource, not our private playground."'' --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:And besides, if you take a look at the bottom of the edit window, you'll see it reads: '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.''' So... yeah. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:If you're going to get this precious about your screenshots, then don't bother uploading them at all. While IMFDB does have a certain unwritten concept of "uploader's privilege" it does not extend to captions that sound like they were sent in Morse code and don't match the way the other captions already on the page are written and formatted. Also, lose the attitude or you'll be getting some time out. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:50, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::Unless the map or game mode is important to the image, which it usually is not, it should be left out. As for the rest of your captions, I have no problem with what you put, just the map/gamemode doesn't belong here. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:38, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Fine fine. I didn't know you were an admin so don't ban me just to prove you can. Sorry if I sounded a little terse, but it is annoying having your words re-written constantly. But just one last thing, cause I noticed you mass changed my changes back to what you had, would you mind changing "the player character" to the class? Such as "The US/Russian Engineer in Multiplayer holds the A-91"? (i'll put that screenshot up in a bit)--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:10, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::I mainly do that because the character has no name in multi, it's much easier in single where you can do "Blackburn holds an X." "An engineer holds an X" seems a little awkward in terms of sentence structure; it feels oddly unspecific about the character holding the weapon being the one the player is controlling. I mainly make a deal of saying "the player character holds..." because it annoys me when people say "the player holds..." since the player is either holding a control pad or a mouse. Typically if the player is holding a gun something has gone very badly wrong somewhere along the line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:28, 6 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] is admin since October 2011, so keep that in mind. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:07, 6 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I didn't know that, congrats! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:17, 6 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I just think that it sounds better than just saying "the player character" because it is just extremely generic. That's why I usually just put "weapon with extra extra extra attatched" without putting player character, cause it's obvious there is a player character holding the weapon. And you don't want people to be holding guns in real life? Tsk Tsk. What kinda firearm wiki admin are you? And relating to that, is there a list of site Admins available? Is it in the forum? Cause I know there's at least 5 of you guys floating around here (plus Bunni, but I have never actually seen him post or discuss something in the main wiki) and it'd be nice to know who they are. --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 10:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::[[Imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database:Administrators|There you go]]. Overly long page title BTW. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:29, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
As long as you don't edit my post about the PP2000 doing as much damage and throwing pebbles at someones face, that's my gem right there. :p (not like there's anything I can do about if it does get edited) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 13:24, 10 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I won't change it. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 10 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Knife used by Dmitri ==<br />
<br />
Does anyone know what kind of knife was used by Dmitri in the mission "Comrades"? Its the one he uses to cut the wires in the garage to unlock the gates. It looks ... funky and not very utilitarian--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:06, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:It's a Spetsnaz machete. [http://www.sovietarmystuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1160] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 21:25, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:A more in-depth look here: http://interestingswords.com/machete/russian-machete-taiga.html [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 17:10, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Furthering the US Army / USMC mix theory ==<br />
<br />
IRL USMC use neither [[M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System|M26 MASS]] nor [[Heckler & Koch M320|M320 GLM]]. Army does. USMC still use [[M203 grenade launcher|M203 GL]] as UGL. As for hand-held grenade launcher... [[Milkor MGL#MGL 140|M32 MGL]]. Spammy for MP but would have worked for SP (like [[Barrett M82#Barrett M107|M107 LRSR]] did). Thoughts shared. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:40, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Well yeah, and they also don't use the M1A2 Abrams. This seems to be in some nebulous future where the USMC has upgraded all their equipment. Also the M107 was actually pretty stupid since all you did with it was shoot some guys on the other side of a courtyard with a non-magnifying scope. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:44, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Gotta say, upgrading equipment in the future one 'A' more doesn't seem as excessive as with entirely new one... But yeah, it's still upgrade. Like, say, giving the future US Army the USMC [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta M9A1|M9A1]].<br />
::Heh, that's the wrong mission they put M107 in. Is there any USMC mission where the long range capabilities of M107 would have served better? (Here I'm starting to think of those sniper missions in '''CoD 4''' and '''MoH''') --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:12, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::I think the best mission to have the M107 in would have been "Rock and a Hard Place," there's a lot of range in that valley. Perhaps even let you pick off officers directing things at the rear so fewer vehicles would show up. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:38, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::In Operation Swordbreaker I sorta hoped you'd get a chance for some M107 urban action from a sniper point, taking out PLR Insurgents from afar. I'd thought big anti-material plus big city with lots of cover, be a perfect role for an Anti-Material sniper, alas it was used against you rather than use from you. Instead you just got a Mk. 11. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 11:14, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Yeah, I was sad the M107 wasn't put to better use, it's the only time it appears in the ENTIRE game. The only I thing I didn't like in the SP. :( - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:31, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::An LRSR mission with the Barrett like the one in CoD4 would have been awesome to have in BF3. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:35, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
http://www.battlefield.com/images/bf3-hooah :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:02, 13 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Holy crap, I thought that was a real Marine in that pic at first! :O [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:35, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Just some silliness ==<br />
<br />
I didn't feel like uploading tons of screens for the page today so I'll put these up just for fun.<br />
[[Image:BF3-Falcon Kick!.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Falcon Kick!''']]<br />
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Damn, those alien bastards are gonna pay for shooting up my ride.''']]<br />
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''I'm gonna kick your ass, bitch!''']]<br />
- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:00, 10 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Would be cool if the kick could actually have been used as a combat move like in '''F.E.A.R.''' or '''Mirror's Edge''' (also made by EA DICE) :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:42, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:More pictures with included silliness are always welcome to me :D If we could make pictures with captions as hilarious as the ones on the Far Cry 2 page, I would always come to the BF3 page whenever I'm in a bad mood xD -- Long Fallen 22:11, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, the Far Cry 2 page is the best page ever created! :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:46, 12 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Wait, how do you kick? [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:37, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::You can't kick, this animation only happens when your character vaults over a low lying object, like a guardrail or a rock. -- Long Fallen 22:44, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Dammit. I am disappoint. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:46, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Current Page Status / More Images ==<br />
<br />
It's amazed me how long the game's been out yet there's still not very many images of all the weapons :/<br />
<br />
I've unlocked all the multiplayer weapons, but unfortunately don't have a capture card for my PS3, which I think is moot since most of the current images look like they were taken on the PC's level of detail.<br />
<br />
As of right now I love the current format the MP7's listing is in, showing off the accessories it can mount at one time, while also showing off each part of the reload animation. It would also be nice if each listing had the weapon's simple ironsights as the first image, or vice versa. <br />
<br />
Either way, we need to make this image complete :D A game like this doesn't deserve to have such a barren imfdb page... -- Long Fallen 22:40, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It's because the game's too fun to take the time to do it ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:43, 12 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== HK53 ==<br />
<br />
Is it only on the 360 version where the HK53 is, for some reason, referred to as the G53? And for some reason it comes standard with a 12x ballistic scope. It's quite amusing, the scope is as long as the gun. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 03:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:It's called G53 on PC as well. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]]<br />
::I think the 12x is a bugged accessory, that's usually only available on those weapons for DICE Employees [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:01, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::HK53 on PS3, hence that screenshot. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::I had assumed that DICE didn't get the rights to use "HK" because in the description for all other HK guns they are referred to as "made by a German weapons manufacturer". Strange that PS3 uses the "HK".--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:44, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:12x Ballistic Scope? Can you take a screenshot and post it here? :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::lol sorry, I don't know the first thing about taking screenshots. I'm sure someone else here could get a screenshot. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::All the BTK guns have the DICE-only attachments unlocked by default, that is to say, all the ones you're never supposed to get. If you want screen shots I'd get them in the next month or less as they'll probly get rid of them in the next patch. 12x Scope: FAMAS, L85A2, HK53, QBZ-95B, QBB-95, MG36. Flash Suppressor: QBU-88, L96. Suppressor: Jackhammer. Note that for the Jackhammer the suppressor doesn't appear on the model in first or third person, the stats don't change, and I'm pretty sure the sound doesn't either, so really, it doesn't exist. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 10:04, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::DICE-only? Cheating Campers >:O<br />
:::HK53 and QBZ-95B with ballistic scope - would be funny to see :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 17 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== "Realistic" ==<br />
<br />
Does it annoy the hell out of anyone else when people talk about how "realistic" BF3 is, specifically compared to MW3? Yes, DICE did a much better job on the modeling and it does have a more realistic ballistics engine, but come on. Every soldier carries around an infinitely reusable parachute? People run around with defibrillators to instantly revive teammates? Somehow the Support class fits an infinite amount of ammo for every caliber in his pocket? Then, of course, every single soldier is trained to use every jet, helicopter and tank, and the jets can be used as taxis with wing mounted seating. Don't get me wrong, these are all things that add to the enjoyment of the game, and they work really well as game mechanics, but not even remotely realistic. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 06:22, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:They call it realistic because using the word "verisimilitude" makes people think you're trying to look clever for the sake of it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:27, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, some aspects of the game are unrealistic, but think about it though. Would you really want to play a game where you run out of ammo ever 5 minutes and have to run around and just wait to die or hope you knife someone to take his weapons, and then hope he too hasn't run out of ammo? Or would you want to have to go through a Gran Turismo-esque license course to be able to use every vehicle properly? While some things are clearly over-the-top, I won't argue with that, some things are obviously put in for the gameplay value, for enjoyment. IF the developers truly wanted a realistic game, they'd have the disc eject and destroy itself after you die. Though the defibrillator comment reminded me of something my friend said, "Oh, you come back to life after getting hit directly with a tank shell! Oh here, let me revive this oatmeal!" [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:49, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Googling "Battlefield 3 is too realistic" and getting matching results is kinda funny. For some interesting comparisons: [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FacklerScaleOfFPSRealism Fackler Scale of FPS Realism] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::As an airsofter I find it that list really funny. Classic: All FPSs / Realistic: Airsoft :D Seriously though, what I look for when I think realism is things that work how they do in real life, how they have to work, not whether they normally are or should be used in that way. BF3 is rare in that it has the following: Tac and normal reloads all done right, one in the chamber, iron sights and optics lined up/used properly, all fire modes that should be on any weapon present, switching modes does not change the gun's stats (ie switching to semi makes gun more powerful) just the mode, damage (which can never be considered fully realistic) at a reasonable level and based on the calibre, bullet travel time and drop. Now, whether the Marines have the right weapons, vehicles, or camo, and stuff like that comes second to me, because even if they don't use a certain camo, they ''could'' as opposed to one in the chamber, which '''has''' to funtion like that. Russian soldiers don't use, say SG 553s, QJY-88s, or Jackhammers, but they could, and more importantly I can, because first and foremost in mulitplayer I'm me. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:58, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Well, things like single reload animation, no +1 round in the chamber, fixed firing mode, hitscan, etc. are usually the result of engine limitations. In this regard we can see that [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite-2 Frostbite 2 Engine] is more advanced than [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite Frostbite 1 Engine] (which already had bullet physics; although magcount and overheating from [http://www.moddb.com/engines/refractor-2 Refractor 2 Engine] are absent; it would have also been nice if there were interchangeable magazines). Regarding the equipment it shows how much there [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch didn't do the research] and [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShownTheirWork shown their work]. Me wants [[Project Reality]] for BF3 :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:02, 17 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I'm not saying that it isn't realistic in some specific areas, sure it is, but it's a video game, and to compare it to COD and say BF is more realistic is kind of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars and saying Star Trek is more realistic because they used the word "tachyon". That being said, I think all four examples I just used are very evertaining. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 04:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Javelins are the best. ==<br />
<br />
Javelin + CITV station on a tank = fantastic combination. The top down fire mode makes killing LAVs and Amtraks, especially on Noshair (sp?) Canals easy, not to mention the massively amusing ability to fire on laser painted aircraft. It's always hilarious to watch an FA/18 blow up and the guy flying just sees FGM-148 Javelin killed him and he wonders what just happened. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 02:22, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Oh my, sounds like tracer darting in BC2 o_O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:56, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::And CITV Station + MBT Guided Shells! Lock, fire, triple kill on one Little Bird! Lock, fire, quad on the other. I was 7/0 20 seconds into the game! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:14, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's even better against a jet. I just try to imagine the expression on a pilot's face as he wonders how the hell an Abrams just shot down his Flanker. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The Javelins may be the best, however, setting up the SOFLAM is akin to setting yourself up with giant neon lights pointing "I'M RIGHT HERE!" to the enemies. I'm sure DICE had good intentions when programming it so that it wouldn't be ridiculously common and spammy, but it just sort of defeats the point of giving it to the stealthy ninja that the Recon class should be. Not to mention it gets even less useful on Wake Island with the mobile AA guns shooting the bright red light visible from just about any distance with the fury of a thousand angry Russians armed with PPSh's. :/ -- Long Fallen 22:32, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Oh, the Tunguska, which has the ability of firing every bullet ever made at the same time?[[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Haha, is there any other? -- Long Fallen 01:26, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== 9K22 Tunguska ==<br />
<br />
I've actually just realized that while the page is mostly (half) complete, the 9K22 Tunguska's armaments haven't been added to the page; because I'd like to know exactly how much ammunition for its guns it carries and approximately for how long would it waste it all before running out, since it's a mobile AA platform? -- Long Fallen 01:36, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Ammunition capacity is 1,904, combined rate of fire is variable between 3,900 and 5,000 rounds per minute, so if we take the lower rate of fire this works out to about 30 seconds of continuous firing. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:45, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::[[Image:2a38m.jpg|thumb|none|400px|2A38M Autocannon - 30x165mm]]<br />
::Example image in case anyone feels like adding. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:36, 22 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Added a piece of info about the M1014 ==<br />
<br />
It's really inaccurate for even a shotgun. I've patterned my shotgun in real life which also has a cylinder bore and the pattern was half the size of the pattern in game. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:46, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:This "short-range shotgun" problem is sadly common in video games, to the point which the TVTropes website has a page just for it. And Frag-12 rounds for the shotguns in this game are horribly overpowered too. I'd take a tighter pattern with a realistic damage-drop-off with distance with buckshot if they could tone down the Frag-12 rounds. For a more realistic shotgun, try playing SWAT 4. You can actually snipe somewhat well with a Benelli Nova in that game if you crouch and wait to become fully accurate.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:55, 21 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:SWAT4... It's the same game that also has handgun sniping and guns that do less damage at point blank range. I was disappointed with the 1911 in that game sadly. :( I'd be careful advising anyone to play that game; its mechanics are ungodly finicky. -- Long Fallen 22:23, 21 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::You could snipe with handguns in Battlefield 2 too... That was actually a tactic employed by experienced BF2 snipers: shoot the enemy with bolt-action sniper rifle and then immediately switch to pistol and finish him off ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:20, 22 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Meh, SWAT 4 isn't as finicky with its mechanics if you know what you're doing. The damage with its guns is somewhat random to reflect how bullets in real life don't always perform as expected (i.e., JHPs clog with clothing and fail to expand, 5.56mm FMJ fails to fragment once inside a target if the bullet isn't properly constructed or the barrel it's fired from is too short, etc.). though I will admit that the M1911 and other .45 ACP guns are underpowered in that game. But I think the reason as to why "handgun sniping" has persisted up until now is that modelling ballistic physics for bullets en masse was only possible when the right programming and hardware appeared. The BF2 example was probably implemented as well given the limited draw distance of the engine; without an omnipresent zoom system to represent how your eyes can focus on far-off objects (like in ARMA 2) the limitations of pixels on our monitors means that enemies become unrecognizable jumbles of pixels at distances we would still be able to clearly see them in real life. Also, because adjustable sights are hard to model in games (as opposed to scopes with ballistic drop markings), pistols often don't have ballistic drop either. I tried compensating for ballistic drop while shooting pistols in the STALKER series--because the iron sights on pistols can't be adjusted it's very difficult, since essentially the muzzle will obscure your target when you aim high to compensate. <br />
<br />
:But the sooner we get realistic shotgun buckshot spreads and ranges in games, the better. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:02, 22 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The problem is, the zoom system only activates when you press a button. So any time you don't, the environment is presented in its distant form. This gives an edge to the person who secured a position and now zooms in in the enemy direction, while the enemy is on the move and can't see said person. In reality, they should see each other evenly. I like this absence of bionic eyes in [[Project Reality]]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:So you have to hold down the button in ARMA2 to focus on distant objects? Well, a toggle system would be much better (probably combined with using a "dynamic zoom" system that used your mouse wheel or two keys to zoom in and out so you could vary the amount of zoom much like your eyes can focus across a great deal of ranges). Still, given the pixellation problem that I mentioned earlier, all PCs in Project Reality have to carry binoculars so as to focus on distant targets, but these cannot be combined with weaponry, so if you're using a kit that has no optics for your gun and are trying to hit something that you can't really see unmagnified (even though in real life you would be able to see and hit a target at that distance), tough luck. Project Reality is also going in the process of making a version based on the ARMA2 engine as well. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 18:17, 23 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Adjustable Zoom would be nice. Sadly, developers haven't yet caught the idea. Even adjustable FOV is not in every modern shooter (and where it is, it might be limited).<br />
::It works both ways in PR: you have problems seeing an enemy in the distance and an enemy has problems seeing you ;) And yes, I'm aware of PR for ArmA II. [http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-reality-arma2 It's currently v0.1], right at the starting line. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:47, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M1014 magazine tube length ==<br />
<br />
Can someone explain to me what's going on with the magazine tube length of the M1014 in-game? The weapon art models show the typical length, but in-game, the magazine length looks like a M3. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 13:12, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
The pump action shotguns in the game start with four round mag tubes. Therefore the art models depict them as such. However, when you unlock "Extended Magazines", the in world model changes to the six round tube for both the Remington and the Benelli.--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 16:18, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Didn't think of that. Thank you. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 17:03, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== UMP trigger group ==<br />
<br />
It seems the world model for the H&K UMP has safe, semi-auto, and full auto, even though the in-game weapon operates with a selectable 2-round burst.--[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 14:53, 28 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:If that's true than it is an error, though the UMP ''can'' have a full/2/semi/safe trigger group. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:32, 28 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Back To Karkand Weapons ==<br />
<br />
So I've been playing B2K a lot, and I've gathered a bunch of trivia about some of the guns that could be added to the page, but I'm not so knowledgable about them so I thought I'd leave them here so someone who knows more can add them into the page.<br />
<br />
The L85A2 has three round burst as well as auto and semi, which as far as I know it doesn't in real life. It also can't mount the M320 which, again as far as I know, is the grenade launcher it mounts in real life. It's also 'cocked' by pressing a bolt release just above the magwell.<br />
<br />
The FAMAS also has burst as well as semi and auto, again I don't know if this is true in real life.<br />
<br />
Both the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B and burst as well as automatic and semi, but I'll admit I know nothing about these weapons. The QBZ-95B and the QBU-88 are reloaded similarly to the AN94/AEK-971 (new mag is used to push the mag release and then inserted) and it looks absolutely bizarre in first person because they're bullpup.<br />
<br />
Also, the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B are chambered in 5.45x39mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm and the QBU-88 is chambered in 7.62x54mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm.<br />
<br />
That's all I've got [[User:Nikonov|Nikonov]] 18:17, 9 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The FAMAS does have all three, and a lot of the info screens are wrong or somewhat wrong, pretty sure they're just copy-pasting errors as opposed to them not knowing the calibre. Everything else you said is correct as far as I know. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:34, 9 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Well, if they are copy-pasting errors then someone should tweet Demize about it ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:10, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The reload animation for those Chinese rifles doesn't use the magazine to push the old mag out. The character pulls out a new mag and pulls the old one out with just his fingers but has the magazine in hand to load into the gun right after. I saw a video of it with an AK once.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:49, 9 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I'm assuming DICE watched this video, I don't have a clue if this is what they teach in the PLA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:40, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:IRL L85A2 mounts not [http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/m320/lg_m320_3.jpg M320] but a different variant of AG36, called [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/Black_Hawk_169/DSC00005.jpg UGL]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:07, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I just Tweeted Demize about the calibre and ROFs being sometimes wrong for the BTK guns. :) Also, he says he's not going to add the HK79 and GL1 due to memory issues, which is fair. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:16, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::That would make a nice "GL Pack" DLC though: GL1, HK79, M203, UGL... And more, should the carbines get corresponding rifle variants :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Also interesting, the QBZ-95's ironsights glitch when you fire. Actually helps. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:23, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I don't have a Twitter, could someone suggest something small on the HUD on hardcore modes that show what fire mode your gun is set to? I change it a lot and the guns with three settings make it difficult.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:43, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I agree, and Tweeted :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:56, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Would be kind of cool if in hardcore mode you could actually look down at your weapon and see the fire selector or check how many rounds are in the magazine. If you think having no HUD is "hardcore," just imagine having to actually worry about taking your eyes off the battleground long enough to check on your weapon like that. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:14, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Pancor Jackhammer ==<br />
<br />
Why? Not only is this weapon relatively pointless since they included the USAS-12 (it seems to recoil less and that's about it) but it comes with a freaking suppressor. Of all the useless devices you can equip to a weapon as insanely loud as the Jackhammer theoretically would be, this and an under-barrel can opener would just about top the list. (I presume they put it on there because the revolving magazine system of the Jackhammer has some similarities to that of a Nagant M1895.) Also, why in the hell is the freaking thing even in the game? There's supposedly a grand total of two of the dumb things in existence. If we're going to throw in an automatic shotgun prototype that never made it into production, how about the H&K CAWS? That one was actually tested by the US military. In another world, it could have been adopted. Or, hell, the Atchisson AA-12. Don't get me wrong, the Jackhammer is a cool looking gun, but it never made it off the design bench and I'm a ''little'' tired of seeing it crop up in video games claiming at least some level of real world veracity (the world "realistic" is a silly one to use for FPS games). [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:24, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:It's supposed to be for the nostalgia, I guess, since it was an unlockable in BF2. Much like them keeping that "DAO-12" name for the Protecta, though it's now a Street Sweeper. There were actually quite a few Jackhammer prototypes, but only two that fired fullauto. Or rather didn't, which is why there were only two. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:They will put XM8 as military tested weapon, methinks. CAWS was pretty cool gun in [[Jagged Alliance 2]] :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:52, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::As stated, it's in because it was in BF2, that's the point of the Back To Karkand pack. Also, it doesn't actually have a suppressor. Well, it does, but it's invisible and does not change any stats whatsoever, not even making you not appear on the minimap. So, there's just a pretend option for a suppressor. Why? Same reason the two ARs, two Carbines, and two MGs have 12x scopes, and the two Sniper Rifles have Flash Suppressors: it was an oversight, those are the attachments you're supposed to ''never'' get those attachments, only DICE gets them, because they're silly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:10, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Well the suppressor actually does do something, it cuts damage down. I actually like the Pancor though, with frag rounds, ext mags, and a Holo sight I can clear out most hallways on metro. But, that is pretty much the only map it is of any use on.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 16:47, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Oh geez, way for me to miss the obvious. I forgot about it being in BF2, having not played the "older" games in quite a while. (Why does 2005 seem so long ago?) Actually, I was a little sad that B2K didn't include the option to hijack semi-trucks and civilian cars like you could with the Armored Fury booster pack. At least you can borrow a Bobcat on Wake Island and try to run enemy soldiers down with it for nothing other than sheer comedy value... And the other "weird" attachments (okay, maybe not the flash suppressor) are at least ''sort of'' useful. You can be extremely annoying with the MG36 fitted with a 12x - no sniper likes dodging nearly-accurate long range machine gun fire, and anything that snipers don't like is fine with me. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 04:26, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Dog Tag Weapons ==<br />
I vote we add a section either at the bottom of the page for all of them, or at the end of each class of weapons for them, because there are a LOT of guns on dog tags that aren't actually in the game. (SAA, SCAR-L, proper MG36, standard FAMAS, that weird suppressed Makarov PM variant, M203, and lots more) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 26 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:If no one objects to this, I'm going to create a sub-catagory at the bottom of each weapon class (SMG, shotgun, etc) that has all the Dog Tag-only weapons, because this page will get very confusing if we don't, as none of those weapons are in the game, just pictures of them. So far (of the top of my head) Makarov PB, Single Action Army, M1911A1, SPAS-12, SCAR-L, FAMAS (standard), M203, M16A2, M16A1, MG36 (proper). I'm sure there are more, but that's what I can think of right now. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::I've added everything I know of, but there are probably more. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:46, 8 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Patch is still yet to reach Xbox it appears ==<br />
<br />
It appears as though the Xbox has been forgotten since the AN 94 still just has two fire modes and the HK416 still has it's three fire modes. Does anyone know more about it than me? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:59, 17 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, we never got that patch that the other two platforms did. I'm assuming it'll be rolled into the patch that was originally supposed to come out for all platforms this month, but is now going to be in March at the earliest. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:57, 18 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Nope, here on the PS3 it's still the same, three-mode HK416 and two-mode AN94. DICE has gone on to say that across all consoles the stats are very different; however, the next patch will put all weapons on equal ground across all platforms. -- Long Fallen 02:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== All Fancy Right Side Dog Tags ==<br />
I'm going to add this to the page soon, to replace the Dog Tag Weapons sections I made before, but right now I need sleep. They're sorted by the name of the real weapon in game, not in game name and not name of weapon in the picture, if those are different. If any of you can figure out what the not-actually-a-QBB-95 is, let me know :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
[[Image:BF3_500KillGuns.jpg|thumb|none|650px]]<br />
<br />
:You have no idea how grateful I am to see this in a neat compilation! Been looking everywhere for just these designs to no avail. -- Long Fallen 02:46, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
I think the QBB-95 is a totally made up frankengun. However the core of it is actually an Enfield L85, you can tell by the vent holes on the receiver: 3 horizontal vents at the rear, then a slightly larger gap followed by two slightly smaller vents. Also visible is the raised portion on the bottom edge of the upper receiver which runs horizontally under these vent holes, and the pistol grip and trigger guard seem to match. On top it seems to be a grossly oversized M4/M16A4 detachable carry handle, and the front is anyone's guess. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:56, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
::Yeah, I think you're right. It also has the generic bipod most guns in BF3 use, Harris Bipod I think it's called. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Flash Suppresor ==<br />
I know this is really not important and probably no one cares, but I think the flash suppresor may be a Vltor VC-1. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 17:15, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:You found it! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:28, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not important? Any info is very welcome on this site! In fact, I was wondering this myself. -- Long Fallen 02:48, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, most definitely. We welcome clarification on any component or add-on used in the game. IMFDB's priorities are much different than those of game-based wikis. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:31, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Do you guys think we should have a section for the attachments in the game, since there are so many? For most games it wouldn't be necessary, but here there are 12 different optics, the aftermarket irons, KAC foregrip, Harris bipod, six (I think) suppressors, PEQ-2, pistol laser sight, and a tac light. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:53, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Yes, please include the info on which flash suppressors and other accessories are being used on which guns in the screenshots (as well as an addendum at the end of the page outlining just which real-life firearm accessories are in the game). There are many of us not in the know who would like to learn about them. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 01:32, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== 3 Expansions planned for BF3 ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/03/07/battlefield-3-close-quarters-announced.aspx 3 Expansions planned for BF3]<br />
<br />
Newest expansion has 10 new guns, what are you guys thinking/hoping they will be? I'm hoping for a USP, perhaps another pump action shotgun,maybe a TAR or a Galil, and an XM8 (wishful thinking on that last one, but they put the Jackhammer in, so why not?) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 18:20, 7 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
EDIT: Can someone fix that link please? I'm not very good at this clearly.<br />
<br />
Me being the AR fanboy that I am, I just want a short barreled AR (10 inches prefferably). cheech98 9:28, 7 March 2012<br />
<br />
:HK416. I'd like to see another pump shotty and some pistols at the least. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:49, 7 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Already spoken for; the M416 is the 10" 416.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 18:16, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Definitely a pump shotgun, maybe an Ithica or a Mossberg with wood furniture (because with black furniture it would look too much like the 870). I would like to see an AK in 7.62x39. I was honestly appalled that BF3 didn't feature a .30 cal AK. An MP5, a Hi-Power, a CZ-75 and a SIG-Sauer would also be nice; a non-tacticool FAL, maybe an FNC (always loved that gun), a Skorpion (come on, who doesn't wanna shoot that thing in a video game), the VZ-58, the HK P7 perhaps? The HK33 would be an awesome weapon to see (although admittedly not too plausible), an Uzi (full size or mini, doesn't really matter to me), a Makarov (still common among the Russian Armed Forces, right?), the P99, and MORE REVOLVERS, DAMMIT. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 02:04, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:Yeah, I think if they added the FAL, it wouldn't be tacticool, seeing as how the G3A3 wasn't. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 1:32, 11 March 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
:Rumours are circulating that two such weapons in Close Quarters Pack are the CZ-75 Automatic is one such pistol as a competition towards the G18 and 93R and a new sniper rifle, the CZ-750 for the Recon. Also two new vehicles rumored are the UH-60 Blackhawk and M2A2 Bradley IFV. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:07, 9 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::But isn't the CQ Pack gonna take place entirely indoors? I'm pretty sure it said somewhere that the four maps in the next pack are going to feture entirely infantry-based, indoors combat. I guess I could see a helicopter working in there somewhere (thinking of the Airport map's chopper-gunners on MW2, I suppose) but it seems like vehicles would break the tense, room-to-room air they're going for here. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 3:56, 13 March 2012 (EST)<br />
<br />
The HK33 is actually in the game already, in the Back to Karkand expansion pack as the 'G53' or something like that. *EDIT* Nevermind, you meant the full size rifle, my mistake...<br />
--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 12:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
It's gonna be a bunch of CQB guns, no doubt. I'd like to see (Assault Rifles) Tavor TAR-21 and the Masada. (Carbines) AKMs and the AUG A3. (Machine Guns) LSAT and the IMI Negev (Snipers) VSS Vintorez and the DSR-1 (Submachine Guns)MP5 PDW and the Colt R0991 9mm. --[[User:Commander Lukas|Commander Lukas]] 16:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year, I think we are going to have our hands full identifying all them because it ain't just firearms either, they're adding a slew of vehicles with each pack as is the norm with this supposed DLC's. "Close quarters" I think is mostly gonna be all transport vehicles so I suspect, possibly Technicals, Civilian Vehicles, maybe an aerial transport helicopter/plane or light attack scout helicopters, possibly light IFV's too. Weapons are likely to be CQB in nature, I'm hoping for alot of Sub-Machine Gun's and Shotguns, the game needs more Pump Shotguns in my opinion. My general wish-list includes:<br />
<br />
* SA58 OSW Battle Rifle and Type 95 Assault Rifle (to round out the Chinese Firepower in BF3, almost the full collection now) for the Assault Kit<br />
* Zastava M92 (Compact AK47 Variant) and the Mark 18 Mod 0 (Ultra compact AR) and possibly the QLZ-87 Automatic Grenade Launcher (as an Anti-Vehicle Weapon, replaces the Rocket Launcher) for the Engineer<br />
* MG3 GPMG and L86A2 (Equivalent to BF3's RPK and M27, gotta have more weapons like those for the Support Kit)<br />
* Mark 12 SPR (American equivalent of the SKS in BF3) and CZ-750 for the Recon<br />
* CZ-75 Auto, H&K MP5, Mossberg 590 Pump Shotgun (if it was a secondary for the Assault I'd be in love with it), TOZ-194, Valtro PM-5, Sawn Off Double Barrel, Benelli M3 Super 90, Smith & Wesson 686, SIG P226, H&K USP, QSZ-92 and FN Five SeveN are just some examples of all kit weapons I'd love to see. <br />
<br />
[[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:56, 9 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:If they added the QLZ-87, it would be '''''WAY''''' overpowered. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 7:28, 12 March 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
:Dunno about the QLZ-87, man. I'd think most Battlefield players are already sick of overpowered, hand-held weapons that can auto-fire frags. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 4:03, 13 March 2012 (EST)<br />
<br />
"There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year"<br/><br />
Thirty weapons in each pack? Are you kidding me? BtK had eight weapons. And how do you know all the packs will have weapons in?[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 12:37, 9 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:Actually, BtK had ten weapons, and he meant at least 30 overall, he just stated it wrong. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 3:28, 9 March 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
They just released a new trailer that shows off some of the weapons in the first expansion pack, I only saw two but there may be more hidden throughout, the ones I saw were the L86A1 and the ACR(I assume it was the ACR, it was however called "ACW-R", I'm seeing a trend with Magpul weapons here with the PDR being renamed the PDW-R. (PS. sorry if I screwed up the formatting, this is my first entry.)<br />
After further searching the complete list seems to be AUG, SPAS-12, ACW-R(ACR), L86A1 LSW, LSAT, MTAR-21, SCAR-L. However some people claim to have spotted the CZ-75 Auto. [[User:Spry|Spry]] 12:38, 13 March 2012 (CET)<br />
<br />
:Good catch Spry, I watched the trailer twice carefully and found the same. I'll make it a list so it's easier to see. As with Karkand we should avoid adding anything new to the main page until we have more to add. I'm assuming the same weapon layout as Karkand until I hear something solid about that full auto CZ-75, maybe it has a stock and is a PDW? I'm also assuming what go to what classes, can't really go wrong there. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 11:47, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
*Assault: SCAR-L (misspelled as SCARL-L; I tweeted Demize)<br />
*Assault: AUG (variant unknown)<br />
*Engineer: ACR (as ACW-R, like PDW-R)<br />
*Engineer: MTAR-21<br />
*Support: L86A1<br />
*Support: LSAT<br />
*Recon: HK417 (as M417, like M416)<br />
*Recon: ???<br />
*All Kit: "M5K" (don't know what it is, described as M5K tactical machine pistol)<br />
*All Kit: SPAS-12<br />
<br />
LIST EDITED<br />
<br />
::I'm excited to see the AUG and the MTAR, but the ACR and SCAR-L... while I have nothing against them (in fact, I really like them) aren't they a bit... implausible? As for the LSAT... HELL. NO. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:15, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Not sure if this is on the up and up, but people are talking about the Recon weapons being the HK417 and the CZ-750 (these are were supposedly found buried in some code in a leaked beta build), and with both of these weapons having an effective range of about a thousand meters, this seems plausible. However others are claiming there will be no Recon weapons in this expansion, which seems like it would a stupid move on DICE's part. In addition people are saying the ACR will be a carbine with a 25+1 capacity, and that the SCAR-L will be the assault rifle weapon (seems odd to have a the 7.62 variant as a carbine and the 5.56 variant as an assault rifle, but oh well). Others say the second All Kit weapon will be something called an M5K? I'm not sure what that is. Again none of this was shown in the trailer, however some people claim to have seen the CZ-750 in the trailer, but it's such a poor view that it could just as well be the SV-98. Also, BF3 fans work fast, someone made these mock ups of the stats screens for the guns: http://imgur.com/a/iOlAQ [[User:Spry|Spry]] 03:08, 14 March 2012 (CET)<br />
<br />
::::After thinking about it a bit, I'm starting to think the M5K is meant to be the MP5K, when you consider that they've renamed a couple of H&K weapons like the HK53 and the HK416, it's plausible that they had some licensing issues with H&K like they seem to have had with Magpul and Glock (No surprise there, considering how notoriously protective Glock is of their brand), So they probably just renamed it the M5K. [[User:Spry|Spry]] 10:29, 14 March 2012 (CET)<br />
:::::Either that, or they misspelled it, like they did the SCAR-L. And if the MP5 doesn't have H&K's name in its name, they probably wouldn't have to rename it. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 7:18, 14 March 2012 (PST)<br />
::::::You also have to take into account that some of the weapons used by said classes in the trailer could just be kits they picked up in the middle of the battle, perhaps to throw off the assertion of which one belongs to who. I'm just glad the L86A1 is in there, finally another British weapon added, just add a Browning Hi-Power or a SIG P226 and I'm set! [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 14:38, 14 March 2012 (CDT)Draco122<br />
<br />
An M203A2 would be a nice addition, since the Marines don't use the M320. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:12, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
I thought this belonged here, since we're on the subject of expansions, here's a HUGE list of updates in this upcoming patch.<br />
<br />
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/news/view/2832654779195992365/ [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 01:56, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
"Recon: HK417 (as M417, like M416)" TAKE MY MONEY ALREADY. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 05:59, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== L96 Irons?! ==<br />
<br />
What in the holy hell is that garbage?! finally a rifle with good iron sights and the stick a SECOND front sight on the end of the receiver rail... for a whopping 7" sight radius... dear god what a disappointment. [[User:Furious Oyster|Furious Oyster]]<br />
:As a side note, that isn't an L96 front sight, looks more like the one that is on the G22 (German variant of the AWM). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:39, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::Hahaha, that was my reaction too. The sights will be fixed in that big patch that should be out this month. It was on that huge notes list. EDIT: I think the BF3 rifle IS the G22; folding stock & front sight. [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/G22_ohne_Schalldaempfer.jpg here][[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:55, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:[[File:AI AW G22.jpg|thumb|400px|none|G22 - .300 Winchester Magnum]]<br />
<br />
: question on the L96, what is it chambered in? It should be .300 Winchester Magnum (I think?) but the ingame description says 7.62mmx51mm NATO... [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 00:03, 21 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::The standard Arctic Warfare is chambered in either .243 Winchester or 7.62x51mm NATO. However, the in game gun is modelled on a magnum rifle (can tell by the size of the magazine) which is chambered in .300 Winchester of .338 Lapua. The caliber is correct for the name of the gun, but wrong for the model it actually is. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:00, 21 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Keep in mind most of the calibres are wrong for the Back To Karkand guns, like the QBs being 5.45mm [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:40, 21 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Shortcuts ==<br />
<br />
I was on the 360 Marketplace this week, looking for new Add-ons for any of my games when I came across several for Battlefield 3. They are class specific and cost 560 Microsoft points apiece or you can get the ultimate bundle which includes Air, Ground and Co-Op 'shortcuts' for a whopping 3200 points. What a shortcut entails is basically a free pass to getting ALL of the specific kits weapons, attachments and gadgets thereby bypassing the experience system if someone has the credits. <br />
<br />
In short, this is a noob's wetdream. Personally, I think they should rename the Ultimate Shortcut Bundle to the Ultimate Lazy Bastards Bundle. Thankfully all of the shortcuts have been getting pretty low reviews. Thoughts? --[[User:Bad Boy|Bad Boy]] 16:28, 3 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Wait, it includes weapon attachments? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:24, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Every other game is dumbed down for casual gamers to blow through in an hour. Why is this any different? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:51, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Shortcuts are gay. 'nuff said. --[[User:Commander Lukas|Commander Lukas]] 17:21, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
I'm not too happy about shortcuts either, but did you really have to use gay as a way to insult it? [[User:Recon42|Recon42]] 10:04, 8 April 2012 (CDT) Recon42<br />
:Sorry, I forgot gay means "happy" --[[User:CommanderLukas|CommanderLukas]] 11:27, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== SPAS-12 = Pump-Action? ==<br />
<br />
I was watching the part of the Close-Quarters Expansion Pack trailer where it showed the SPAS-12, and it looked like it was operating in pump-action mode. Is anyone else disappointed by this? [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 8:57 7 April 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
I'm actually quite glad, I was quite disappointed with the lack of pump-action shotguns in game. I guess they could say it's an SAS-12 so it's a pump-action only variant in real life. [[User:Recon42|Recon42]] 10:04, 8 April 2012 (CDT) Recon42<br />
<br />
I don't really care, I want more pump actions, but another tube fed semi action shotty too. --[[User:CommanderLukas|CommanderLukas]] 11:40, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Same here, it's not technically wrong, and since we need at least one more pump shotgun, I'm fine with it. I also think they went with the SPAS-12 because most pump shotguns like 870s, Mossbergs, Ithicas, etc, looks very similar. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:20, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::True, but they could have done the Tactical version of the Benelli Nova or SuperNova. They look unique enough. Or they could have done the Kel-Tec KSG, except without continuous fire of its two magazines (I'm looking at you, MW3).<br />
<br />
What's wrong with a pump shotgun with 12 shots (*EDITED* the Kel-tec KSG)? The street sweeper (DAO-12) has 12 shots AND is semi-auto, then there's the USAS-12 with 10+1 and FULL-auto, a pump action with 12 or 12+1 capicity wounldn't be much of a big deal. - Wantabe_Warrior38<br />
<br />
:You think the SPAS-12 has 12 shots? It only has an 8-round magazine. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 8:57 7 April 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
::Pretty sure he meant the KSG. And yeah, the SuperNova looks pretty sweet, I like the trigger guard :) EDIT: Are there any pump-action mag-fed shotguns? I can't think of any, but that'd be pretty cool, like the M1014 and Saiga-12K. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:30, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::There are conversion kits to convert popular pump guns to magazine fed, but they look odd with the magazine being further forward than normal, under the existing magazine tube. There are pump actions that are made with box magazines like the [[Valtro PM5 Shotgun]] series, or the [[Hawk shotgun series]]. There is also the [[Franchi SPAS-15]] which is semi/pump like the SPAS-12. I have also seen Saigas that have been converted to pump action. These are just off the top of my head, there are probably other, more obscure weapons out there. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:47, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== KH2002 Magazine ==<br />
<br />
Is it using the 20 round stanag magazine? Looks like it. If it is, ill mention it on the kh2002 portion of the page</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Heckler_%26_Koch_Mark_23&diff=544622Talk:Heckler & Koch Mark 232012-04-09T19:30:46Z<p>Masterius: /* Confirmation of photo */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Other Images (Moved from page)==<br />
[[Image:PunisherMk23SOCOMprop.jpg|thumb|none|400px|The Heckler & Koch Mk. 23 SOCOM Mod 0 - .45 ACP rubber prop pistol used in the film ''[[Punisher, The (2004)]]''.]]<br />
<br />
==Fourth picture==<br />
<br />
The fourth picture is ID'd as a SOCOM, but wouldn't a real SOCOM have "HK Mark 23 USSOCOM Cal 45" on the slide? [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 10:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
:No clue-[[User:S&amp;Wshooter|S&amp;Wshooter]] 04:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
- I believe the real weapon has the HK logo, then (exactly as typed) MK23 USSOCOM Cal.45<br />
<br />
EDIT - Though, as I've read, it may have markings along the lines of US PROPERTY MK23 MOD0 as well. In any case, nothing like the fourth picture (which has since been identified as an Airsoft gun). [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 19:36, 28 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Would an airsoft weapon have .45 CAL engraved on it? I have an MP5 airsoft SMG, and it has 6mm on it, not 9mm. --[[User:Camden Hennis|Camden Hennis]] 00:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:A lot of airsoft companies (especially Japanese ones like Marui) used to do that, but it seems to have fallen out of style lately, especially with US and Taiwanese manufacturers. There are still some that do though, like the UHC VP-70.--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 01:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==LAM unit==<br />
can someone PLEASE make a page for the Wilcox Industries MK23 lam unit? It's a very popular lam and very expensive.<br />
<br />
Wilcox industries ceased manufacturing them in 2001. Although most famous for being attached to a MK23 a whole range of pistols could be fitted as Wilcox Industries had gun adapters for many guns including, Glock and the USP. <br />
<br />
There are two basic models:<br />
<br />
Sosmart - laser module (two models)<br />
1. laser only<br />
2. infrared and laser<br />
<br />
Beamer - flashlight module<br />
flashlight and infrared flashlight<br />
<br />
2nd generation models had the battery pack on the side of the Sosmart module. The Sosmart module also had a LCD read out on bottom which had battery life and laser blink rate.<br />
<br />
Price ranges today are $500-$3500<br />
<br />
Here is a link to early models (1st generation, note missing side battery caps)<br />
http://www.streetpro.com/usp/UITC.html<br />
<br />
Here is a picture of a 2nd generation, laser only module<br />
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151038142<br />
<br />
Feel free to use any of the pics as I took the pictures.<br />
<br />
Also have a M16 mount adapter<br />
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151040929<br />
<br />
Again feel free to use any of the pics as I took them.<br />
<br />
I will provide pics of 2nd generation infrared module if needed.<br />
<br />
my email, chris koehne at hot mail dot com<br />
<br />
There isn't much info available online or anywhere and if IMFDB could set up a page it would surely get views and visits and be a important source of info for many people.<br />
<br />
I can also provide scans of the manual.<br />
<br />
Thank you<br />
<br />
Chris<br />
<br />
:An entire page dedicated to a ''laser module''? I don't see that ever happening. Sorry. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:42, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Confirmation of photo ==<br />
<br />
http://www.navyseals.com/files/MK23.jpg<br />
<br />
Is this a photo of Mk. 23? Seems like some other pistol, but may be just a perspective issue. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:35, 8 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, it's a Mark 23. Looks posed to me. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:44, 9 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:30, 9 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Heckler_%26_Koch_Mark_23&diff=543965Talk:Heckler & Koch Mark 232012-04-08T21:35:11Z<p>Masterius: /* Confirmation of photo */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>==Other Images (Moved from page)==<br />
[[Image:PunisherMk23SOCOMprop.jpg|thumb|none|400px|The Heckler & Koch Mk. 23 SOCOM Mod 0 - .45 ACP rubber prop pistol used in the film ''[[Punisher, The (2004)]]''.]]<br />
<br />
==Fourth picture==<br />
<br />
The fourth picture is ID'd as a SOCOM, but wouldn't a real SOCOM have "HK Mark 23 USSOCOM Cal 45" on the slide? [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 10:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
:No clue-[[User:S&amp;Wshooter|S&amp;Wshooter]] 04:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
- I believe the real weapon has the HK logo, then (exactly as typed) MK23 USSOCOM Cal.45<br />
<br />
EDIT - Though, as I've read, it may have markings along the lines of US PROPERTY MK23 MOD0 as well. In any case, nothing like the fourth picture (which has since been identified as an Airsoft gun). [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 19:36, 28 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Would an airsoft weapon have .45 CAL engraved on it? I have an MP5 airsoft SMG, and it has 6mm on it, not 9mm. --[[User:Camden Hennis|Camden Hennis]] 00:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:A lot of airsoft companies (especially Japanese ones like Marui) used to do that, but it seems to have fallen out of style lately, especially with US and Taiwanese manufacturers. There are still some that do though, like the UHC VP-70.--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 01:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==LAM unit==<br />
can someone PLEASE make a page for the Wilcox Industries MK23 lam unit? It's a very popular lam and very expensive.<br />
<br />
Wilcox industries ceased manufacturing them in 2001. Although most famous for being attached to a MK23 a whole range of pistols could be fitted as Wilcox Industries had gun adapters for many guns including, Glock and the USP. <br />
<br />
There are two basic models:<br />
<br />
Sosmart - laser module (two models)<br />
1. laser only<br />
2. infrared and laser<br />
<br />
Beamer - flashlight module<br />
flashlight and infrared flashlight<br />
<br />
2nd generation models had the battery pack on the side of the Sosmart module. The Sosmart module also had a LCD read out on bottom which had battery life and laser blink rate.<br />
<br />
Price ranges today are $500-$3500<br />
<br />
Here is a link to early models (1st generation, note missing side battery caps)<br />
http://www.streetpro.com/usp/UITC.html<br />
<br />
Here is a picture of a 2nd generation, laser only module<br />
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151038142<br />
<br />
Feel free to use any of the pics as I took the pictures.<br />
<br />
Also have a M16 mount adapter<br />
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151040929<br />
<br />
Again feel free to use any of the pics as I took them.<br />
<br />
I will provide pics of 2nd generation infrared module if needed.<br />
<br />
my email, chris koehne at hot mail dot com<br />
<br />
There isn't much info available online or anywhere and if IMFDB could set up a page it would surely get views and visits and be a important source of info for many people.<br />
<br />
I can also provide scans of the manual.<br />
<br />
Thank you<br />
<br />
Chris<br />
<br />
== Confirmation of photo ==<br />
<br />
http://www.navyseals.com/files/MK23.jpg<br />
<br />
Is this a photo of Mk. 23? Seems like some other pistol, but may be just a perspective issue. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:35, 8 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=543860User:Masterius2012-04-08T19:22:09Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Intro ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St merc list.jpg|none|100px|]]<br />
'''''"Get out of here, Stalker!"'''''<br />
<br />
=== About me ===<br />
<br />
*'''Rank:''' User<br />
*'''Name:''' Dan<br />
*'''Eastern Zodiac Sign''': Metal Horse<br />
*'''Western Zodiac Sign''': Aries<br />
*'''Occupation''': Student<br />
*'''Location''': Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />
<br />
=== In a nutshell ===<br />
<br />
I read a lot about firearms. I am particularly interested in Russian Firearms. I handled some of them: several civilian hunting rifles and shotguns, and basic Soviet weaponry (listed at the bottom of the page).<br />
<br />
And as of 11.11.11 I don't edit any primary pages (sans mine), less the admins will find my actions controversial and ban me, and only participate in discussions (secondary pages).<br />
<br />
== My favorite films ==<br />
<br />
*[[Apocalypse Now|Apocalypse Now Redux]]<br />
*[[Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Blood Diamond]]<br />
*[[Born on the Fourth of July]]<br />
*[[Che Part One: Argentine|Che: Part One]]<br />
*[[Che Part Two: Guerrilla|Che: Part Two]]<br />
*[[Enemy at the Gates]]<br />
*[[Full Metal Jacket]]<br />
*[[Green Zone]]<br />
*[[Jarhead]]<br />
*[[Platoon]]<br />
*[[First Blood|Rambo: First Blood]]<br />
*[[Saving Private Ryan]]<br />
*[[Sucker Punch (2011)|Sucker Punch]]<br />
*[[9th Company|The 9th Company]]<br />
*[[Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost), The|The Brest Fortress]]<br />
*[[Hurt Locker, The|The Hurt Locker]]<br />
*[[Rock, The|The Rock]]<br />
*[[Thin Red Line, The (1998)|The Thin Red Line]]<br />
*[[White Sun of the Desert (Beloye solntse pustyni)|The White Sun of the Desert]]<br />
*[[Valkyrie]]<br />
*[[War Horse]]<br />
<br />
== My favorite video games ==<br />
<br />
=== SP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]]<br />
*[[Delta Force: Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Medal of Honor (2010)|Medal of Honor]]<br />
*[[Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising|Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising]]<br />
*[[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R.]]<br />
<br />
=== MP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Battlefield: 1942|Battlefield 1942]]<br />
*[[Battlefield 2]]<br />
*[[Battlefield: Vietnam]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare|Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1]]<br />
*[[Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising|Joint Operations: Combined Arms]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra 1: Ostfront]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad]]<br />
<br />
== Firearms I've got training with ==<br />
<br />
*[[Makarov PM#Makarov PM|PM Pistol]]<br />
[[File:MakarovPM.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Soviet PM - 9x18mm]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
*[[AK-74#AK-74|AK-74 Rifle]]<br />
[[File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Soviet AK-74 - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
<br />
== WIP ==<br />
<br />
Both page and lists are incomplete and WIP.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=543730User:Masterius2012-04-08T14:33:52Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Intro ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St merc list.jpg|none|100px|]]<br />
'''''"Get out of here, Stalker!"'''''<br />
<br />
=== About me ===<br />
<br />
*'''Rank:''' User<br />
*'''Name:''' Dan<br />
*'''Eastern Zodiac Sign''': Metal Horse<br />
*'''Western Zodiac Sign''': Aries<br />
*'''Occupation''': Student<br />
*'''Location''': Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />
<br />
=== In a nutshell ===<br />
<br />
I read a lot about firearms. I am particularly interested in Russian Firearms. I handled some of them: several civilian hunting rifles and shotguns, and basic Soviet weaponry (listed at the bottom of the page).<br />
<br />
And as of 11.11.11 I don't edit any primary pages (sans mine), less the admins will find my actions controversial and ban me, and only participate in discussions (secondary pages).<br />
<br />
== My favorite films ==<br />
<br />
*[[Apocalypse Now|Apocalypse Now Redux]]<br />
*[[Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Blood Diamond]]<br />
*[[Born on the Fourth of July]]<br />
*[[Che Part One: Argentine|Che: Part One]]<br />
*[[Che Part Two: Guerrilla|Che: Part Two]]<br />
*[[Enemy at the Gates]]<br />
*[[Full Metal Jacket]]<br />
*[[Green Zone]]<br />
*[[Jarhead]]<br />
*[[Platoon]]<br />
*[[First Blood|Rambo: First Blood]]<br />
*[[Saving Private Ryan]]<br />
*[[Sucker Punch (2011)|Sucker Punch]]<br />
*[[9th Company|The 9th Company]]<br />
*[[Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost), The|The Brest Fortress]]<br />
*[[Hurt Locker, The|The Hurt Locker]]<br />
*[[Thin Red Line, The (1998)|The Thin Red Line]]<br />
*[[White Sun of the Desert (Beloye solntse pustyni)|The White Sun of the Desert]]<br />
*[[Valkyrie]]<br />
*[[War Horse]]<br />
<br />
== My favorite video games ==<br />
<br />
=== SP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]]<br />
*[[Delta Force: Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Medal of Honor (2010)|Medal of Honor]]<br />
*[[Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising|Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising]]<br />
*[[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R.]]<br />
<br />
=== MP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Battlefield: 1942|Battlefield 1942]]<br />
*[[Battlefield 2]]<br />
*[[Battlefield: Vietnam]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare|Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1]]<br />
*[[Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising|Joint Operations: Combined Arms]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra 1: Ostfront]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad]]<br />
<br />
== Firearms I've got training with ==<br />
<br />
*[[Makarov PM#Makarov PM|PM Pistol]]<br />
[[File:MakarovPM.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Soviet PM - 9x18mm]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
*[[AK-74#AK-74|AK-74 Rifle]]<br />
[[File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Soviet AK-74 - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
<br />
== WIP ==<br />
<br />
Both page and lists are incomplete and WIP.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=543258User:Masterius2012-04-07T15:00:05Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Intro ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St merc list.jpg|none|100px|]]<br />
'''''"Get out of here, Stalker!"'''''<br />
<br />
=== About me ===<br />
<br />
*'''Rank:''' User<br />
*'''Name:''' Dan<br />
*'''Eastern Zodiac Sign''': Metal Horse<br />
*'''Western Zodiac Sign''': Aries<br />
*'''Occupation''': Student<br />
*'''Location''': Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />
<br />
=== In a nutshell ===<br />
<br />
I read a lot about firearms. I am particularly interested in Russian Firearms. I handled some of them: several civilian hunting rifles and shotguns, and basic Soviet weaponry (listed at the bottom of the page).<br />
<br />
And as of 11.11.11 I don't edit any primary pages (sans mine), less the admins will find my actions controversial and ban me, and only participate in discussions (secondary pages).<br />
<br />
== My favorite films ==<br />
<br />
*[[Apocalypse Now|Apocalypse Now Redux]]<br />
*[[Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Blood Diamond]]<br />
*[[Born on the Fourth of July]]<br />
*[[Che Part One: Argentine|Che: Part One]]<br />
*[[Che Part Two: Guerrilla|Che: Part Two]]<br />
*[[Enemy at the Gates]]<br />
*[[Full Metal Jacket]]<br />
*[[Green Zone]]<br />
*[[Jarhead]]<br />
*[[Platoon]]<br />
*[[First Blood|Rambo: First Blood]]<br />
*[[Saving Private Ryan]]<br />
*[[Sucker Punch (2011)|Sucker Punch]]<br />
*[[9th Company|The 9th Company]]<br />
*[[Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost), The|The Brest Fortress]]<br />
*[[Hurt Locker, The|The Hurt Locker]]<br />
*[[Thin Red Line, The (1998)|The Thin Red Line]]<br />
*[[White Sun of the Desert (Beloye solntse pustyni)|The White Sun of the Desert]]<br />
*[[Valkyrie]]<br />
*[[War Horse]]<br />
<br />
== My favorite video games ==<br />
<br />
=== SP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]]<br />
*[[Delta Force: Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Medal of Honor (2010)|Medal of Honor]]<br />
*[[Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising|Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising]]<br />
*[[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R.]]<br />
<br />
=== MP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Battlefield: 1942|Battlefield 1942]]<br />
*[[Battlefield 2]]<br />
*[[Battlefield: Vietnam]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare|Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1]]<br />
*[[Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising|Joint Operations: Combined Arms]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra 1: Ostfront]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad]]<br />
<br />
== Firearms I've got training with ==<br />
<br />
*[[Makarov PM#Makarov PM|PM Pistol]]<br />
[[File:MakarovPM.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Soviet PM - 9x18mm]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
*[[AK-74#AK-74|AK-74 Rifle]]<br />
[[File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg|thumb|none|601px|Soviet AK-74 - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
<br />
== WIP ==<br />
<br />
Both page and lists are incomplete and WIP.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=File:AK-74_Bakelite.jpg&diff=543120File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg2012-04-07T08:27:53Z<p>Masterius: uploaded a new version of &quot;File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg&quot;: Again</p>
<hr />
<div>AK-74 with bakelite magazine - 5.45x39mm<br />
<br />
[[Category: Gun Image]]</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=542710User:Masterius2012-04-06T12:57:04Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Intro ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St merc list.jpg|none|100px|]]<br />
'''''"Get out of here, Stalker!"'''''<br />
<br />
=== About me ===<br />
<br />
*'''Rank:''' User<br />
*'''Name:''' Dan<br />
*'''Eastern Zodiac Sign''': Metal Horse<br />
*'''Western Zodiac Sign''': Aries<br />
*'''Occupation''': Student<br />
*'''Location''': Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />
<br />
=== In a nutshell ===<br />
<br />
I read a lot about firearms. I am particularly interested in Russian Firearms. I handled some of them: several civilian hunting rifles and shotguns, and basic Soviet weaponry (listed at the bottom of the page).<br />
<br />
And as of 11.11.11 I don't edit any primary pages (sans mine), less the admins will find my actions controversial and ban me, and only participate in discussions (secondary pages).<br />
<br />
== My favorite films ==<br />
<br />
*[[Apocalypse Now|Apocalypse Now Redux]]<br />
*[[Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Blood Diamond]]<br />
*[[Born on the Fourth of July]]<br />
*[[Che Part One: Argentine|Che: Part One]]<br />
*[[Che Part Two: Guerrilla|Che: Part Two]]<br />
*[[Enemy at the Gates]]<br />
*[[Full Metal Jacket]]<br />
*[[Green Zone]]<br />
*[[Jarhead]]<br />
*[[Platoon]]<br />
*[[First Blood|Rambo: First Blood]]<br />
*[[Saving Private Ryan]]<br />
*[[Sucker Punch (2011)|Sucker Punch]]<br />
*[[9th Company|The 9th Company]]<br />
*[[Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost), The|The Brest Fortress]]<br />
*[[Hurt Locker, The|The Hurt Locker]]<br />
*[[Thin Red Line, The (1998)|The Thin Red Line]]<br />
*[[White Sun of the Desert (Beloye solntse pustyni)|The White Sun of the Desert]]<br />
*[[Valkyrie]]<br />
*[[War Horse]]<br />
<br />
== My favorite video games ==<br />
<br />
=== SP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]]<br />
*[[Delta Force: Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Medal of Honor (2010)|Medal of Honor]]<br />
*[[Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising|Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising]]<br />
*[[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R.]]<br />
<br />
=== MP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Battlefield: 1942|Battlefield 1942]]<br />
*[[Battlefield 2]]<br />
*[[Battlefield: Vietnam]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare|Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1]]<br />
*[[Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising|Joint Operations: Combined Arms]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra 1: Ostfront]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad]]<br />
<br />
== Firearms I've got training with ==<br />
<br />
*[[Makarov PM#Makarov PM|PM Pistol]]<br />
[[File:MakarovPM.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Soviet PM - 9x18mm]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
*[[AK-74#AK-74|AK-74 Rifle]]<br />
[[File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Soviet AK-74 - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
<br />
== WIP ==<br />
<br />
Both page and lists are incomplete and WIP.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Medal_of_Honor:_Warfighter&diff=542687Talk:Medal of Honor: Warfighter2012-04-06T09:46:36Z<p>Masterius: /* Dual Sights! */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I hope it will be more exciting than the previous one... and set into the present day, or near future (as for MW2 and MW3)."<br />
<br />
<nowiki>*wonders how this one will Americanise historical events*</nowiki>[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:13, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar---[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"You're perfectly right, The Wierd It."<br />
<br />
If they set it in the near future, it'll just be another CoD clone with tacticool AKs, ACRs, G36s, and all that BS. Being based on real events (and people, in the case of Rabbit, Panther, and Dusty) is one of the things I liked about MoH2010. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Perhaps you're right once more, The Weird It/Spartan 198. Which makes the difference between it and Modern Warfare Games... Yes."<br />
<br />
== LaRue OBR ==<br />
<br />
I changed the M4 entry, but I don't have a picture of the OBR without LaRue watermaks. -- Spike785 2/25/2012 10:35PM<br />
<br />
Yeah, I went ahead and removed the M4 picture. No point in having it there if it isn't the weapon being described. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I suppose I should have done that. Should I link the 7.62 OBR pic? Or buy one and upload some sexy pics of it? [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 23:19, 25 February 2012<br />
<br />
Its not an OBR like I originaly thought, its a PredatAR. The handguard is too thin to be an OBR's, and the way the handguard angles up toward the reciever gives it away. [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 9:21, 26 February 2012<br />
<br />
:It is an OBR 5.56, the top rail is raised up higher than on a PredatAR. The 5.56 OBR is pretty different to the 7.62 in terms of the handguard being more like the PredatAR one. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MEU(SOC) Pistol? ==<br />
<br />
Is that the M1911 variant in new game? The lower part of slide doesn't seem to end like one. It could be one of custom M1911s used by Delta Force. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I'm just happy there's a 1911, period. lol Hopefully it appears in the SP campaign, though. I've no interest in MP. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:35, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
the M1911 makes me happy as well but I'd also like to see another SIG in SP. [[User:Bristow8411|Bristow8411]] 22:20, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sniper Rifle in Trailer ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/shoot-win Shoot To Win | Medal of Honor]<br />
<br />
It's one of the four: [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-cs5.php CS5] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-300.php TAC-300] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-50.php TAC-50] / [http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?clicktype=rifles M1A] (McMillan customized)<br />
<br />
And totally not M40 of any kind.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Sweet, we get to play as Ryan McMillan. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:24, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
It's propbly the the TAC-300, the limited edition of the game come with a MP SEAL skin and the TAC-300 rifle early unlocks. - Wantabe_Warrior<br />
<br />
== More details of the cover art! ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/worlds-finest-illumination-tools-and-tactical-products SureFire, LLC | Medal of Honor]<br />
<br />
The [http://www.surefire.com/FA556-212-Suppressor FA556-212 Sound Suppressor], attached to the [http://www.surefire.com/mb556k-muzzle-brakeadapter.html MB556K Muzzle Brake / Suppressor Adapter];<br />
<br />
The [http://www.surefire.com/m720v.html M720V RAID WeaponLight], attached to the left rail of the weapon, with its remote dual switch attached to the top rail of the weapon.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:23, 31 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Dual Sights! ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/04/brilliant-aiming-solutions Trijicon, Inc. | Medal of Honor]<br />
<br />
''"We will also give the player the ability to deploy ACOG® weapon sights with a “piggy-back” Ruggedized Miniature Reflex or RMR® for close-quarter engagements without having to transition from the primary to a secondary weapon system. But just in case, if gamers want to forgo all magnification, they may also choose to outfit their weapon with the full sized Trijicon Reflex Sight."''<br />
<br />
'''Another conclusion''': the weapon sight on the cover art turns out to be [http://www.militarywarfighter.com/Trijicon_TA01NSNRMR_p/trijicon-ta01nsn-rmr.htm TA01NSN-RMR] rather than [http://www.militarywarfighter.com/Trijicon_TA01NSNDOC_p/trijicon-ta01nsn-doc.htm TA01NSN-DOC].<br />
<br />
'''Another speculation''': will the [http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=RX01 RX01] / [http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=RX01NSN RX01NSN] reflex sight have correct amber dot reticle, like IRL, or incorrect red dot reticle, like in [[Battlefield 3|BF3]]? Place your bets.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:46, 6 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=File:AK-74_Bakelite.jpg&diff=542676File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg2012-04-06T07:00:29Z<p>Masterius: uploaded a new version of &quot;File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg&quot;: Edited a bit</p>
<hr />
<div>AK-74 with bakelite magazine - 5.45x39mm<br />
<br />
[[Category: Gun Image]]</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Battlefield_3&diff=542484Talk:Battlefield 32012-04-05T21:21:24Z<p>Masterius: /* Going Rambo */</p>
<hr />
<div>See [[Talk:Battlefield 3/Archive 1]] for older discussions.<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
== Why am I not surprised? ==<br />
<br />
Part of me isn't too surprised that the CODMW3 article would be taken off the Work in Progress Status in a much shorter time than BF3's page. Personally I think MW3 committed a war crime with how atrocious the M16A4 looks both in the first person and 3rd person models of it. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:00, 16 November 2011<br />
<br />
:Just the M16? :/ Hell, the P99 is the only pistol where they didn't get something wrong. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:14, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It has more to do with the fact that MW3 makes more mistakes and therefore is far more fun to write about. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:18, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::My personal favourite screw up in MW3 has to be the Skorpion's scope rail mount, with the "MG36" as a close runner up. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 03:02, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I still mad about the fact they suddenly decided that it'll better that the M4A1 will have a 20-round magazine rather than a 30-round magazine -_- --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 03:05, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Lol good points all around. I'm not too knowledgeable on everything but I'm in the service and I use the M16A4 often. So it stuck out like a sore thumb the moment I picked up the rifle in the game that something was really freaking off about it. Like it wasn't already bad having 30 rounds come out of a 20 round mag. But bolt on rails to A2 Handguards? Really?! XDDD I don't know how accurate that P99 is, but it irks the hell out of me seeing it held one handed in the First Person Model. [[User:DarkSamuraiX1999|DarkSamuraiX1999]] 00:25 16 November 2011<br />
<br />
Ya know? It's funny that the "fact" they are using military advisers to make the game better in "tactics" and stuff (yeah, right), this military advisers or what ever, aren't aware of the way the developers model the weapons and doesn't 100% reassemble to the real life one's :/ I guess the developers tell them "We don't really give a damn about realism, just tell us how the hell modern warfare works"... Still, the guys of BF3 made a bit better, though it does have also many things unrealistic, like the fact Marines are using M16A3's instead of M16A4's, and some of them running with an M240 like it a was wooden gun. Sigh. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 02:57, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The thing about an advisor is that his job is to answer questions. It's up to the developers if they a) ask him the right questions and b) pay attention to his answers. I believe ''Star Trek's'' science advisors have publically complained that they're only asked for advice on what terminology to use and never on whether something is actually good science. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:15, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
One thing SP Campaign of BF3 proves is that BF3 shouldn't have SP Campaign in the first place. One would expect it to be more authentic, yet it takes approach of CoD: "We just put randomly weapons we have in MP whether or not they fit in". So suddenly we have Marines with M16A3s and M240Bs (instead of M16A4s and M240Gs), insurgents (exactly insurgents and not organized militia from pre-alpha trailers) with AK-74Ms and AEK-971s (instead of AK-47s / AKMs), Spetsnaz member Vladimir with 5.56 A-91 (despite Russian forces simply not using this caliber even for SF), etc. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:27, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Let's not forget that the protagonist of the game, Blackburn, during the interrogations scenes, you can see his name and branch tags that they're in white and straight rather than MARPAT and in an angle with the chest pockets. Also, one of the the guys in Blackburn's team, though I can't remember his exact name (the guy who carries M136 all the time), wears MultiCam OCP, still, rather than MARPAT uniform. Eventually, war games wouldn't be realistic as real life, even in the small parts. --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 11:22, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Except my games (If I ever make games). :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 11:34, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Plus, they (Marines) get CAS from Little Birds. Apparently, to the game devs the terms 'US Army' and 'USMC' are interchangeable. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:50, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I don't recall the insurgents using AEK-971s in the Iran missions, usually it was a random stew of your typical AKS-74u, AK-74M (don't real militants from the former Soviet bloc use the more modern 5.45 AK-74 at times?), RPKs, and the KH2002. However, the terrorists with Solomon from later on in the story do use all this, and even more somewhat outlandish equipment. Also, since the page is incomplete, can you explain to me how you identify the Marine's M16 models as the A3 versions? During the campaign I recall Blackburn's M16 as being able to fire in fully automatic. (Except that one mission where you inexplicably jump off with an HK416) Also, didn't Vladimir use the AS VAL throughout the Spetsnaz missions? And although it's not top-notch realistic Ala ''The Hurt Locker'', I wouldn't exactly outright call it the CoD approach. I mean, just look at what they did with Black Ops. Pointing out every inaccuracy in that game is to the point of turning it into a drinking game. Long Fallen 17:49, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Other than that one HK416 Blackburn had, which was odd, if they worst things the Marines had were M16A3s instead of A4s and M240Bs instead of M240Gs, then I'm happy enough. And the PLR only had 74Ms, 74Us, and RPKs if I remember correctly, the later enemies had AEKs. All the weird guns were given to Kaffarov's private army, as he is an arms dealer. It's like complaining you see a few M1928s instead of M1A1s in a WWII movie. Black Ops.. is Black Ops, and MW3 had FADs in the hands of African militia... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:20, 16 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe it is related to the "AKS-74U vs. UMP issue": in some of the videos of "Operation Swordbreaker", inside of the building, leading to anti-sniper position, one of the insurgents is certainly equipped with AEK-971, with others having AKS-74U and AK-74M (AK-74 would be correct for former Soviet bloc militant but not AK-74M unless he managed to scavenge it from Russian soldier). For M16A3, check one of the Marines on the way to bridge in the same mission. And while Kiril used the AS "Val", Vladimir used the 5.56 A-91. And yes, as Alex said, Black Ops... is Black Ops *sadface* --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:17, 17 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::You are right, that one insurgent always has an AEK, but that's an exception. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:31, 17 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Cod always screws up the guns<br />
:What does that have to do with Battlefield 3? [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:12, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sidearms ==<br />
<br />
Has anyone else noticed Campo carries ''two'' sidearms, one on his chest and one by his hip? Looks like two Glocks.<br />
<br />
[[Image:BF3-Glock-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ten more and he'll be a Glockenspiel.]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:18, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I'm sorry, but that caption was just too good. On topic however, it seems as if the handgun holstered on his chest seems pretty low res to be made out. Could it be a designer oversight or something? - Long Fallen 17:21, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe they are copying Epps from [[Transformers: Dark of the Moon]], he nonsensically carries a pair of Glocks in the same way as well... --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Well, that's the Assault kit's chest, with the Glock and all, so they most likely gave him a leg holster and forgot about that one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:01, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's like in MW2 where the snipers carry unusable M1911. Although it is peculiar that the Marine in this game carries unusable Glock and not M9 or MEU(SOC). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:17, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== BTK Weapons ==<br />
<br />
Finally! http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg<br />
<br />
:MG36 and Jackhammer? Guess the XM8 and plasma rifle will be in the next DLC. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:30, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I guess that confirms that there will be no PLA Faction DLC *sadface* I still hope for EU Faction :|<br />
:Also confirmed that HK53 is back intact :)<br />
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Why do they choose to include the "HK" prefix in the HK53, but not on the M416? [[User:Santos|Santos]] 11:26, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I'll ask Demize why this HK is okay (and the HK21 in BF2). Actually, they hinted they might do more weapon DLCs later, so I'm expecting a "Back To Bad Company" pack with all three XM8s and other stuff. Also, not a plasma rifle, but I've always thought it'd be cool to see Halo guns in another game, the human ones. For those of you that don't know, they all make functional sense. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:48, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::lol yeah all those functional Spartan Lasers we have lying around. Though it would be cool to see an NTW-20 in a videogame. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:45, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::[http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle Have] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle1 you] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle2 said] [http://www.moddb.com/mods/point-of-existence-2/images/ntw-20-anti-material-rifle3 NTW-20]? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:34, 12 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== RPK ==<br />
<br />
Incidentally, I need to check if the RPK-74 has a flash hider. If not, with wood furniture and a ribbed metal magazine, it's actually an RPK with a sight rail, not a -74 at all. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:10, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Maybe I didn't spend enough time using it, but I remember it having black furniture. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 12:44, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Checking my PS3 video captures it's very dark brown; more to the point, though, it's got that standard AK-style handguard with two holes through the middle (with a RIS foregrip sticking out the bottom, admittedly); the -M polymer handguard is a different shape and has ridges all along the top of the gas tube. <br />
<br />
::[[Image:Soviet RPK-74.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK-74 light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
::[[Image:rpk74m.jpg|thumb|none|601px|RPK-74M light machine gun with 45-round box magazine - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
::[[File:BF3-RPK-1.jpg|thumb|none|601px|]]<br />
<br />
::If it doesn't have a flash hider, I think that makes it an RPK. I thought I could see one there, but in my PS3 video it looks like it doesn't have one and the in-world and pickup models don't have one either. I was going to say "except the scope mount" but MPM's RPK image has one:<br />
<br />
::[[Image:RPK lmg.jpg|thumb|none|600px|RPK Light Machine Gun with 40 round magazine - 7.62x39mm]]<br />
<br />
::Is this normal? From what I'd read the scope bracket was an -M thing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:35, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Thanks for clearing up the RPK differences, as for the scope rail, scopes are nice to have sometimes, I'm sure some of the older RPKs were fitted with scope mounts as aftermarket parts in real life. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:06, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::As the RPK in the game only has the bracket fitted when a sight is there, I would certainly put it in the "aftermarket" category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:37, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Oh right, just like the AKS-74U becomes an AKS-74UN when mounted with optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:47, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Just to assure you this ''does'' happen (it's so nice having a PS3 video of half the game to pull shots from): <br />
<br />
:[[Image:BF3-RPKForegrip.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
:RPK with inexplicable foregrip. I'd just forgotten they don't all have that. Also, is it just me or is the scope mounting screwed to the side of the dust cover rather than attached to a bracket? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Single Action Army ==<br />
<br />
Just letting you guys know, as stated on its page it is called Single Action Army on this site as there are so many nearly identical replicas calling it the more correct Colt 1873 might actually be wrong, and SAA is used as a catch-all term. However, just as we assume a full-size Glock is a 17 unless we can tell otherwise, we also assume a gun in a game is not a clone, unless we can tell otherwise. Therefore, it is assumed that the drawing of the SAA is the original Colt 1873, and should be named as such. This is just to avoid an edit war, or something. :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M224 ==<br />
<br />
I don't know about Xbox, but on the PS3 the M224 definitely has an M7 baseplate in multiplayer. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 15:54, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yup, it has one on 360. Lol at the baseplate having a designation :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:19, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Just about everything in the military has a designation. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:10, 10 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Feel free to change it, I was going off it not having one in single. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:31, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Kaffarov's Private Army ==<br />
<br />
While I understand that Kaffarov is an arms dealer, it boggles my mind how so many times in fiction there are people who are able to procure such military spec equipment like the F2000, Mk.17 (SCAR-H), AEK-971, and so many others. Surely the companies and or countries that produce them don't freely sell them to whatever buyers there are? My question is how would people like Kaffarov even be able to avoid the system and acquire such equipment? I don't know if it has been answered elsewhere, or for obvious reasons '''hasn't''', but it's just something that I haven't been able to explain logically. -- Long Fallen 18:03, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Reminds me of [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Legionnaire Legionnaire] from [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield:_Bad_Company Battlefield: Bad Company]. And that guy paid his mercenaries in ''gold bars'', mind you. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Kaffarov... Makarov... Kaffarov... Makarov... Is it only me or does BF3 is trying to copy MW3 in many matters? :/ --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 23:29, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Um, what's so suspicious about Russian (or Russified) surname ending in -ev or -ov? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 00:51, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I'm not sure either, but it lets us have the cool guns people don't really use, so it gets a pass in my books. Also, those two names aren't really that similar, and the characters are nothing alike. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:12, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:To answer the question, no. Any customer who could afford top-drawer equipment would be dealing directly with the company that made it, the kinds of people who go to dodgy arms dealers want weapons that are simple enough to equip illiterate militiamen with, cheap enough to equip a ''lot'' of them with, and have widely available spare parts and ammunition. It's no longer the era when unpaid former Soviet commanders would empty entire arms depots onto the black market and flee to countries that don't have extradition treaties with Russia, and no longer the era when you could get a superpower to pony up a whole bunch of equipment and training just by saying you were fighting for / against communism. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:46, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I see, but I recall this story from a few years back -[http://www.expatica.com/be/news/local_news/factory-tightens-security-after-gun-thefts-23226.html Stolen Five-seveNs from FNH factories] (I had no idea the P90 was a handgun xD) - And then there's this too -[http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20081112_worrying_signs_border_raids Mexican drug cartels being armed with P90s and Five-seveNs] So I still want to know, what are the likely chances of seeing terrorists with such equipment? I mean, these articles seem to bring it to light. (Sorry if I'm going off topic) -- Long Fallen 00:42, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::With Mexico it's a situation where a lot of the top-class armament is purchased in the United States and smuggled across the border; similar arrangements were used to smuggle arms to the IRA during The Troubles in Northern Ireland. That's the "buying directly from the supplier" kind of deal, and is usually done without a dealer acting as an intermediary (because the Cartels have enough money to do it themselves, or take the weapons in part payment for supplying product to drug dealers). Your typical Eastern Bloc / African arms dealer just buys up weapons somewhere a war is ending and ships them to where a war is still going on, because the buyers don't have the contacts, legitimacy or resources to do it by themselves. A lot of the guns these guys circulate have been involved in local conflicts for years or even decades.<br />
<br />
:::Top-end hardware typically comes from governments and organisations. Insurgents in Iraq didn't get top-of-the-line anti-tank weapons and training in making IEDs from some guy in the business of moving weapons, they got them from sympathisers in places like Iran. Alarmism about what ''kind'' of weapons terrorists have is pretty foolish anyway, since generally they prefer the instant, indiscriminate destruction of explosives to trying to shoot people with a gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:58, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, I see, thanks for enlightening me :) -- Long Fallen 20:25, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Whoever said "a lot of the top-class armament...blah blah Mexico... smuggled from US..." is rather wrong. The Mexican cartels who have P90s and M16s and etc western weaponry are getting it from the Mexican military and police, only a small percentage of the guns near the US border are actually smuggled in to Mexico from the US. The numbers seem higher because recently Mexico has been sending in stores of arms they have confiscated over the past X amount of years (that they know can be most likely traced to the US) to get traced at the same time. This leads to a overblown number that looks good on anti-firearms pamphlets. If you think about it a bit, what do you think would be easier and cheaper:<br />
<br />
1. Finding and paying someone to buy 10 semi-automatic guns in the US at ridiculous prices, risking him getting caught, losing your money, going through all the background checks, etc, then sneaking them over the border. Not to mention finding ammo.<br />
<br />
Or<br />
<br />
2a. Paying some guerrillas in some SA country x amount of dope to bring in a ship, container, truck, or plane full of 100s or 1000s of eastern bloc or former US military weaponry, that is most likely going to be fully automatic. Plus large quantities of ammo for said weaponry.<br />
<br />
2b. Stealing or buying from a corrupt military/ police official brand new weaponry.<br />
<br />
The "X% of guns in Mexico are from the US" myth is a fallacy created by the Mexican and US govts and heavily compounded by the ATF smuggling them themselves or letting them walk, and the FBI for not laying out the specifics of the stats. Then the subsequent (ratings improving) media hype compounds it further.<br />
<br />
Not saying it doesn't happen, just that it is greatly exaggerated.<br />
<br />
Now as for how someone like Kaffarov would get the weaponry, its pretty simple. 1. Start a (possibly dummy) corporation (possibly in a different country). 2. Buy from a manufacturer saying they are intended for "security", or "testing", or hell, even arming your own "PMC". 3.Lock and load. How do you think PMCs such as Xe (Blackwater), AirScan, Aegis DS, etc.. get their new "HSLD" weaponry? Most international arms trafficking treaties do not extend to selling firearms to private entities in the same way they do governments.<br />
Respectfully, the (somewhat intoxicated)-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 02:33, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I wasn't saying it's the majority source, just the source of the more pricey / modern equipment. These people have supply networks that move ''tons'' of drugs across the border, they're not going to consider moving guns in the other direction a substantial risk; one would imagine their US buyers are probably the same people who buy their drugs, considering they're already going to be smuggling stuff back as payment and keeping their activities secret. Most of the weapons they get from the US aren't purchased legally (the big myth is they're bought legitimately from normal gun stores, SO WE MUST CLAMP DOWN ON THIS). Most of their stuff is indeed bought in from other sources, but weapons like the Barretts aren't going to be coming from just anywhere, and there ''is'' precedent from this happening in Northern Ireland where the IRA got a lot of their best weapons from Irish expatriates in America.<br />
<br />
:As for Kaffarov, the main problem with the mythical top-end arms dealer is who he's supposed to sell these rare weapons on to, not how he'd get them himself. Sure, if it's ''just'' equipment for his private troops he might splash out, but he wouldn't be wholesaling in exotic arms with rare ammo and parts because nobody would buy them, plus he'd have problems with the companies he's buying from wondering why their weapons are suddenly turning up in conflict zones in the exact quantity they're selling them to his shell company. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I know who! He's obviously selling to the Russian Army, Brazilian and African militants, and Makarov's terrorists in MW2 and MW3! [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:32, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
: From what I remember in the BF3 novel Kaffarov was a former GRU agent handling weapons and training with then political ally Iran, who got too deep in the local agendas and was probably compromised. IN the novel his weapons were less new (Uzis and shit), but I could totally buy that Kaffarov was still connected enough to Russia's arms trade that he could probably weasel crates of AEK971s out of them without too much trouble. Supposedly that's how Solomon got the suitcase nukes in the first place anyway, off Kaffarov. (as a note the book's plot is little more coherent than the game, probably worth the pickup if you're trying to dissect the game's narrative.)--[[User:Toadie|Toadie]] 04:17, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:This entire discussion is clearly a case of thinking way harder about what Kaffarov is hypothetically capable of procuring for his men than DICE did while they were working on the game. As for the whole "Mexico Gun Smuggling Debate" - try reading some academic reports on the subject before claiming that the statistics were cooked up ([http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Chapter%206-%20U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico,%20New%20Data%20and%20Insights%20Illuminate%20Key%20Trends%20and%20Challenges.pdf Wilson Centre: U.S Firearms Trafficking to Mexico] is a long read, but it does illuminate the various ways guns are smuggled and how they are interdicted) --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:41, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
well look at the Libyan civil war were both sides were able to get massive amounts of G-36s --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 20:38, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Most of the weapons such as Barretts, M16s, etc.. are coming from the Mexican military. As for the IRA in the 80s I know all about that, that was a different time. Many things happened back then that could not happen now. Plus the IRA stopped getting guns from the US when they realized it was easier to get them from places like Palestine and etc..<br />
With Libya... well HK is in deep right now for selling to some state police in Mexico that they shouldn't be selling to, it wouldn't surprise me if they sold to Libya and other places.<br />
And Markit, the report you linked to actually states in a couple places that the reports are skewed by many factors.<br />
This can state the facts better than I can: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/90PercentMyth.pdf<br />
-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 00:57, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:There was also an incident during the Georgia-Russia war where Georgian SF were seen with G36s that they previously weren't known to have. HK weapons are turning up in all kinds of strange places. :S [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:28, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:@Ranger01 - There's no verifiable proof that all those high-end weapons are coming solely from Mexican law enforcement - last time I checked, they could get better weapons than the FN PS90s, Romanian WASR clones, MAK-90s, AR-15 clones with the post-ban features, SKS rifles with Tapco furniture etc. that have been turning up in seizures of cartel arsenals. I know that the 90% statistic was erroneous, but I also do not believe that the percentage is only 12% according to your report (extrapolating only from serial numbers is faulty in itself when criminals usually take measures to remove/modify them). Besides, the "most deadliest weapons come from Central America" does not equal "most of the weapons come from Central America", which seems to be the tack that your article is taking. Also erroneous is the claim that Mexican military personnel are defecting and taking "American-made" weapons with them - the "150,000" figure was for desertions (which take place for any number of reasons in a conscription-based system) and most soldiers are armed with Mexican-produced versions of H&K weapons.<br />
<br />
::On an additional note, the G36s that were seen in Libya were likely a gray market sale - a firm buys the weapons with the end user certificate for one country, ships them there, then transfers them to the actual destination. A more controversial story would be that FN directly sold several hundred FN 2000s, FN 303s and P90s to Libya in 2009-2010. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 18:32, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Politics aside, F2000s would be ''great'' for a desert country; they're almost airtight. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:22, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Well Saudi Arabia did adopt the F2000 as their standard rifle. -- Long Fallen 21:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Hmm, didn't know that. As probably most of us are, I haven't had hands on on most of these, but am well read on them, and the F2000 would be one of my first choices of assault rifle if I had a country/army :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:51, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Now it's just a matter or wondering if they'll ever get around to using them... Sad is the day when hundreds of beautiful F2000s sit untouched in Arabian armories, gathering up dust. It's enough to bring a tear to any IMFDB user's eye xD -- Long Fallen 02:43, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Researchers point to '''Heckler & Koch G3A3''' being replaced with '''Steyr AUG''' in Saudi Arabian Army[http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_standard_infantry_rifle_for_saudi_arabian_army][http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110305182603AA3EBn4] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::So the SA National Guard bought the 55,000 F2000s... but the AUG was on issue? Did it replace the AUG? The standard rifle is the G3A3 as of now? A lot of this information feels so outdated. -- Long Fallen 16:19, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Saudi Arabian National Guard is separate from Saudi Arabian Army. An analogy would be 'Waffen-SS' (SANG) and 'Wehrmacht' (SAA)[http://www.dnipogo.org/fcs/comments/c424.htm] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:08, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Blackburn from BHD ?? ==<br />
<br />
Go see the Colt M4 section and the M4 series below it is said that Black burn holds M4 quite often. I would like to ask is this Blackburn any how related to Todd Blackburn from Black Hawk Down, the Ranger who fell from the Black Hawk chopper? - [[S9771773G]] 09:47, 20 November 2011 (GMT)<br />
<br />
:I imagine it's just a coincidence, Blackburn is a "heroic" surname like Carver or Slater or whatever. I'd have thought if they were referencing Black Hawk Down they'd have named him after someone like Shughart or Gordon, really. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:08, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Doubt it. 'Battlefield 3' is unrelated to 'Black Hawk Down', plus, Todd Blackburn is Army Ranger while Henry Blackburn is Marine Recon. Proper analogy would be Patterson's from 'Medal of Honor' series. Both are in Army and [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/Jim_Patterson one] is actually the grandson of [http://medalofhonor.wikia.com/wiki/James_Steven_Patterson another]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:19, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:'''P.S.''' Although, this would explain the appearance of Little Birds...<br />
<br />
::There's also the fact that Todd Blackburn is a real person while Henry Blackburn is a fictional one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:14, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::True, there is even a page on [http://www.aweekendofheroes.com/vips/todd-blackburn.php Todd Blackburn]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 21 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::From the link posted by Masterius: "In reality, it is not known why Blackburn lost his grip on the rope and is generally assumed that his inexperience led to his fall ('''However, Master Sergeant Matt Eversmann states that around the time when Blackburn fell, the UH60 canted slightly, and had to put his hand down to stay upright'''. The ranger that roped in after Blackburn also swears that he had grabbed the rope.) Additionally, the film incorrectly portrays Blackburn as a new arrival to Somalia, when in reality he had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company."<br />
::::Um... why would Matt Eversmann have any trouble staying upright in said canting helicopter ''when he was in a Humvee on the ground''? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::[http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/somalia/nov16/default16.asp Because he was, in fact, in a Blackhawk?] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 15:00, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::'''P.S.''' ^ Oh, the age there is said to be 18, and "just months out of a Florida high school", instead of 20, and "had been in country for the same amount of time as the rest of his Company". So which of the descriptions is the correct one?<br />
<br />
::::::They'd said on the DVD commentary as well as in the History Channel documentary about the raid that Eversmann was with the convoy the whole time. Guess they didn't have their facts straight. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:16, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::He was the leader of Chalk Four as shown in the film and was inserted by Black Hawk, callsign Super 67. He didn't go to the crash site as shown in the film though, instead he was part of "The Lost Convoy" carrying the captured prisoners, think that is what you are thinking of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:36, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::An interesting thing I found about Todd Blackburn was that he was born on October 25, the same date that BF3 was released, maybe that date was selected on purpose by DICE? [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 19:34, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Now this is intriguing... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:01, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I can tell you without any doubts that BF3 has several [[Generation Kill]] references. For example:<br />
<br />
- The main protagonist is part of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion.<br />
<br />
- When driving towards Tehran in the humvees and complaining that they signed up for an ambush, the driver says "Frankly gentleman, I'm not hearing the aggression I'd like. Keep scanning". Which is a reference to the 5th episode "A Burning Dog" when the team leaders are preparing to clear out an ambush by a bridge.<br />
<br />
- When Henry Blackburn and Co. drives in a convoy to capture Kaffarov the arms dealers. Matkovic, the guy wearing MultiCam OCP and the AT4, was sleeping on the convoy and when woken up he says "thirty four minutes... I've been asleep for thirty four minutes drinking a vanilla milkshake." Also a reference from the 5th episode A Burning Dog, when Ray Person wakes Brad Colbert to a team leader meeting, Brad responds "fifty six minutes. I've been asleep for fifty six minutes".<br />
<br />
[[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:00, 20 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Not to mention the character named Chaffin. There's more, I'll have to play it again to find them all.-protoAuthor 23:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M203 Dog tag ==<br />
<br />
I was watching my new unlocked dog tags on Battlelog, and saw that the 40mm GL proficiency Dog tag has an M203 in the background.<br />
Should it be added to the list of weapons appearing in the game?<br />
<br />
http://battlelog-cdn.battlefield.com/public/profile/bf3/stats/dogtags/lb/dtb094.png?v=1628729 <br />
<br />
[[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yes it should, like the SAA. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:29, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, though I would prefer these as full screenshots if possible (ie someone unlocking / viewing them), I never like pages full of different aspect ratios and weird tiny images. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Well since we're mentioning weapons appearing on dog tags but not the actual game for usage, the USAS-12 proficiency dog tag has a SPAS-12 silhouette for some reason. It was probably directly ported from Bad Company 2 given how it looks. -- Long Fallen 17:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Quite a number are, the SCAR-H is a SCAR-L. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:37, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::It actually peeves me that many of the assault rifle proficiency dog tags use the icons for the Bad Company 2 models, like most of the assault rifles equipped with grenade launchers. Especially the F2000 one, which isn't even possible to have an underslung grenade launcher, let alone the EGLM pictured on it. :P -- Long Fallen 21:05, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::You'd be wrong about the F2000 not being able to take a grenade launcher.<br />
<br />
:::[[Image:Fn f2000 3.jpg|thumb|none|500px|FN F2000 - 5.56x45mm NATO with [[FN EGLM|FN GL1]] - 40mm]]<br />
<br />
:::[[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:38, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, sorry, I should've made it clear that while the dog tag shows off the EGLM, you can't mount any kind of grenade launcher to the F2000 itself to use. -- Long Fallen 00:42, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::You mean ''in the game''. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:05, 26 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Going Rambo ==<br />
<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMcM7OpC2dI&hd=1<br />
<br />
Just how realistic is it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:02, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I think they should implement an overheating system for all the light machineguns. Just like in Battlefield 2. [[User:Santos|Santos]] 06:33, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Barrel changes would be more interesting, I think. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:32, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::And then there will be people complaining that Battlefield is becoming simulator. Rather odd, since magazine system and overheating system were part of the core Battlefield games since the beginning... Sigh, Bad Company... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:52, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
More funny stuff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxsbTjPe2fs&hd=1 --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 16:21, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Back to Karkand ==<br />
<br />
There's an expansion pack coming out in December, and it's going to have ten new guns and four new vehicles.<br />
<br />
<br />
Here's a list of the weapons that I can absolutely confirm from seeing in the kill-feed in the trailers:<br />
<br />
MG36 with a top rail instead of the carrying handle/optics<br />
<br />
L85A2<br />
<br />
QBZ-95B<br />
<br />
QBU-88<br />
<br />
FAMAS (Looks to be the Felin version)<br />
<br />
There also looks to be some sort of Kalashnikov style weapon, but it's not shown clearly enough for me to recognize.<br />
<br />
<br />
Here are the trailers if you feel like playing Where's Waldo:<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=TyN_Zjw4l-s Overall Trailer]<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjTmieRMKjo Karkand Trailer]<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg Oman Trailer]<br />
<br />
<br />
Also of note, I have the PC version and just about all the weapons unlocked. I might upload screenshots if I get the chance.<br />
--[[User:AchingScaphoid|AchingScaphoid]] 08:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Unless they've got the screenshot feature working now, you'll need FRAPS to get screenshots. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:20, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:There are 2 AK variants in the first trailer you posted, I think the first is an [[AKM]], second is the same [[AKS-74U]] with the incorrect milled receiver as seen in the main game. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:37, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The L85 is in the first trailer, although very briefly. 0.37, there's an L85. Old plastic handguard, RIS instead of the 19mm rail. No idea on the optic, other than it not being a SUSAT. --[[User:Spanner|Spanner]]<br />
<br />
::I think it might be an Elcan of some sort but not sure. The newest modification to the L85A2 replaces the old rail with a MIL-STD-1913 rail and is fitted with an Elcan Spectre with a piggybacked CCO. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I've also seen real L85s with ACOGs, so using that could be authentic for optics. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:13, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::An ACOG on a MIL-STD-1913 would be incorrect though. British ACOGs have a proprietary mount for the original 19mm rail. Any gun that is fitted with the new rail will be using the ELCAN. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Indeed:<br />
:::::[http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/files/BEMIL069/upload/2008/02/2_acog.jpg L85A2 with ACOG on mount]<br />
:::::[http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee252/TarnishUK/SpecterOS4x.jpg L85A2 with Specter on rail]<br />
:::::--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:41, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I added them to the page, feel free to expand them. This picture was on the Blog a few weeks back, it shows all 10 weapons:<br />
<br />
http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Blogs.Components.WeblogFiles/battlefield_5F00_bad_5F00_company/Back_2D00_to_2D00_Karkand_2D00_Assignments.jpg<br />
<br />
[[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:12, 29 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:List of all weapons and attachments in BtK expansion:<br />
<br />
:http://mp1st.com/2011/11/30/the-complete-list-of-bf3-back-to-karkand-weapons-and-attachments-revealed/<br />
<br />
:--[[User:Wikinerd|Wikinerd]] 09:04, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Really, the best they could manage was photos of someone's TV? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I'm not too sure what to think of the Pancor Jackhammer being in this game, I mean, we've already got the USAS-12 as the automatic shotgun, if they wanted to add in another one, they could've just added in the AA-12. Anyone kinda with me on this? - Long Fallen 14:20, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not a fan of automatic shotguns anyway, since they, technically, overshadow the semi-automatic ones (because of selective fire). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::The USAS-12 has competition with the Jackhammer, I haven't unlocked it yet but I remember picking up a kit with the Jackhammer and it was like using a slightly lower capacity DAO-12 with it's 6+1 rounds but with automatic fire rate. This video shows some gameplay, extended mags give it 13+1 magazine capacity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q95ICdl9fsE&feature=related It's apparently "slower than the USAS" from what little experience I've had with it and from people I've asked about it [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MG36 ==<br />
I know that there were only 100 or so MG36s made, but isn't a standard G36 with a bipod foregrip and a double drum mag exactly the same thing? I get that if there's one in a movie it will actually be a G36 with bipod and drum added, but in a game can't it be called an MG36 since it didn't start as something else? Also, it IS an MG, not an AR, unless the RPK, M27, and QBB-95 are ARs too. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:21, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:An MG36 has a bipod handguard, C-mag, ''and'' a heavy barrel and reinforced action. This, like basically every other MG36 that has appeared in anything, is based on a standard G36 with a bipod and drum, as the Bundrswehr use. I don't think there's even a specific name for the configuration, but it is ''not'' called MG36. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:35, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Oh okay, but would the heavy barrel look any different externally? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:11, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::I believe it's mostly internal. However, IIRC the MG36 was rejected the same year the MIL-STD-1913 standard was drawn up, so an "MG36" with a flat-top rail would have to be a G36 or an after the fact modification of an MG36, and speculating a gun that isn't real ''must'' be modified is trying a little too hard to cover up a simple naming error. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 20:15, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Oh okay, well, if it had the standard carry handle I'd say it should be "MG36", but seeing as it has the "C" one, it's a G36 with a bipod, C-Mag, and G36C rail. To be fair though, MG36 is a ''lot'' easier for the sake of the game. On DICE's part I mean. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:10, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Alex - According to G3Kurz on HKpro, the barrel OD is 30% thicker. http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-long-gun-talk/94949-wtk-mg36-barrel-question.html Evil Tim - Where did you hear that it had reinforced action? --[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 22:44, 30 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== "Kaffarov" ==<br />
<br />
So, is this mission always buggy as hell, or did I just have a bad run screencapping it? As well as that weirdness with the Barrett I had guns inheriting the texture of the floor they were on top of (I have a lovely image of a linoleum QJY-88), some pictures of MP7s with their magazine against their front grip and their stock hovering in front of them at ninety degrees to the gun and every single USAS-12 in the level appearing on the ground with no magazine. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:42, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:That always seems to happen with USASs and MP7s, but please, please add the linoleum QJY-88 to the main page, just for laughs :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 04:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Also, I really didn't get the last level. Why would you hijack a train that was already going to where you want to go (thus drawing attention to yourself for no good reason), then randomly rig it to explode even though you've already got a nuke on board? And why was one man with a detonator standing in the same room as the explosives that detonator set off? And how did Blackburn know that trigger would set off the random bombs and not the nuke? I have questions, dammit. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:54, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:21, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::This is my explanation and I know there's several holes in it but bear with me, it makes slightly more sense than just a lack of general explanation. The hijacking of the train was probably a distraction whereby once they got off their intended stop with the nuke, they would send it hurtling somewhere else for the police and other emergency services to follow. This would have then given them an opportunity to get the nuke to Times Square undetected while the emergency services scrambled to stop the train wired with explosives. In terms of the detonator, the guy was probably the patsy to serve as a suicide bomber-type to ensure the distraction seemed like the real deal and to lay blame once again on the PLR rather than Solomon. Blackburn knew that the trigger wouldn't set off the nuke because nukes require specialised arming devices if I'm not mistaken and you can't use a normal detonator to blow it up. Just my explanation of the events. Feel free to lay waste to my over-active imagination that came up with this somewhat cockamamie fill-in to explain the plotholes in the last mission. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:25, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::The thing is the train was already ''going'' to Times Square, and detonating a nuke underground would create a sinkhole a large chunk of lower Manhattan would fall into; if anything it would be even worse than detonating it on the surface. Solomon could have just sat there alone with the thing in his lap on a timer or dead man's switch, the only purpose the hijacking ultimately served was to draw attention to the fact that something was up.<br />
<br />
::::Then again, this story also had my very favourite, the framing device of the protagonist describing the action. I always smile when I imagine how it's going during the actual level. "So then I ducked into cover. Looked up but didn't shoot. Reloaded. Aimed down my sights. Saw a guy ducking out so I fire twice and reloaded and then..." "Weren't we supposed to be on a time limit?" "One Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seventh Amendment." "Ah, yes, the right to defence in the form of an average-length modern video game." [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:47, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Correct, the train was going to Times Square but perhaps it was not the last station? I'm not sure how the trains work in New York because I don't personally live there but it's possible that Times Square was a station on a longer line of stations where Solomon could have sent the police, ESU, FBI, Homeland Security and whatever government agencies to follow the train rigged with explosives. Creating a sinkhole does seem like a better idea but I think the purpose of blowing it in Times Square itself above ground was to send a message. The mushroom cloud that would be better seen from above ground would strike more fear, in my opinion but hey, that's just my two cents. <br />
<br />
:::::In terms of the framing device, I have to agree with the utter ridiculousness of the idea of Blackburn describing the action he performed when recalling every single detail from the playable level but it's far more plausible than Black Ops. Thinking of how Mason could describe every single detail of his action movie experience as well as the experience of the SR-71 Blackbird pilot just made my brain stop completely. Especially when he was extremely doped up and possibly tortured judging by the bloodstains on various parts of his clothing. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:59, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4D0-s8OsI&feature=related Believe me, an underground nuclear detonation is hard to mistake for anything else]. As for Blops, I always had the image of the guys questioning him picking up the bottle of truth serum and checking the expiry date when he started with the G11s and WA2000s. Or the whole THE NUMBERS thing just ending up with him forgetting his wife's birthday. "No! Reznov said it was tommorrow!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:11, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Holy wow. I know that's destructive and it's horrible to say this but that is indeed impressive. My sentiments exactly. However, they probably just went meh because they (as in the interrogators who were CIA) were probably using LSD as a truth serum as well as a mind control drug at the time. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 05:46, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
I just got this game (yay! I absolutely love it, even the singleplayer) and I was gonna get screenshots but I heard I need FRAPS. What is FRAPS and how do I get it? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 21:34, 1 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It is a program that can record gameplays and you can also take screenshots with a hotkey if it is running in the background. It has a freeware version. I think in the free version it can only save images in BMP, but u can convert them easily. Get if from here: www.fraps.com. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 00:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The free version watermarks videos, not sure if it does the same with screenshots. You're best off saving in BMP since the JPEG captures are pretty abysmal quality with lots of artifacting. Give me a few days first, though, I have fifteen hundred images of the singleplayer I need to sort through. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:29, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I just need screenshots and I have Photoshop CS4. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 18:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Then yeah, http://www.fraps.com/ to download the free version. Wikipedia says it doesn't watermark screenshots even on the free version, just be sure you have plenty of HD space since a 1920x1080 BMP weighs 3-6 megabytes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:05, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::596 GB. :B - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:49, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::: I currently use FRAPS myself. It does not watermark screenshots. Haven't tried getting videos yet. Anyways, the race is on to see who can put up pictures first.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 14:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I will be uploading a lot of great screenshots for the page tomorrow, should I add pics of the iron sights or just ones of interest? (ie, misaligned sights, the M9's correct sights, the MEU's tritium sights, etc.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:45, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, I'm in favour of having ironsight pictures on all video game pages, since they're so often missaligned, or out of scale, as a lot of what we do here is point out flaws and educate (hopefully) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 01:06, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yay, more work. I need more weight to this. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:22, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Iron sights are fine as long as they're reasonably interesting and the article doesn't have too many weapons; this one should be ok. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:30, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== My God ==<br />
<br />
I am so glad with battlefield 3 and mainly dice the are actually listening to the community and something even better they are fixing incorrect guns.<br />
<br />
Ex:<br />
<br />
Tweaked the AN94 so its burst fire better conveys the real world advantage offered by this weapon.<br />
<br />
Added Single Shot to the AN94 as an available fire mode.<br />
<br />
Slightly increased the recoil on the M416 and removed the Burst Fire mode (this weapon incorrectly had burst fire, which was not authentic).<br />
<br />
from latest patch --[[User:Armyguy277|Armyguy277]] 19:13, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Cool! =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:19, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Oh! But HK416 is still called M416? :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:13, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Wait, really? they removed burst from the 416 and added semi to the 94? Wow, cool! Those were the only fire mode errors too :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Well, aside from not being able to fire the spotting rifle on the SMAW. I still think it would be amusing to be able to shoot people with your 9mm tracer that shoots like a rocket. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::What? Oh, looked it up: "Each round consists of a special 9mm tracer bullet, crimped into a 7.62x51mm NATO casing with a .22 Hornet blank cartridge for propellant". That is the most WTF round I've ever heard of :O [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 13:41, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Alex, I don't suppose you could share the link with anyone reading this page? :) -- Long Fallen 14:17, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Oh right :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I found a more detailed look at the round here: http://cartridgecollectors.org/cmo/cmo05oct.htm [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I wonder if they're going to fix the "SVD" as well [[User:Santos|Santos]] 08:01, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Is that just for PC? 'Cause I'm on the PS3 and the HK416 still has a burst mode and the AN-94 still doesn't have semi-auto as a fire mode. Or is this for the campaign? I haven't played the campaign again in a while. [[User:GunEnthusiast|GunEnthusiast]] 04:28, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::With the new patch that came out for the upcoming DLC, Back to Karkand. The AN-94 got the single-shot fire-mode and the HK416 got the burst-fire mode removed. Confirmed on the PC [[User:Santos|Santos]] 05:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::On the PS3 here, AN-94 still has the automatic/burst selection as before; no semiautomatic fire. The HK416 also still has semi/burst/fire selection. - Long Fallen 23:18, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
:::Xbox still has the old AN 94 and M416 fire modes. Also if you use the AN 94 with iron sights and swap back and forth between your pistol, the front sight disappears on the Xbox. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:30, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::That change is in the next patch we're supposed to get, it takes longer for consoles. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:54, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Any idea of when that is? I just started using the AN 94 and love the two round burst but I'm hindered at long range because of the recoil and rate of fire.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:05, 26 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:No idea, it has to go through certification from MS/Sony and usually takes 2-3 weeks. Ish. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:51, 26 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Changing Descriptions in screenshots. ==<br />
<br />
If you take the screenshot, go ahead and put whatever you want in there. But if you're going to edit my words, do so only if there is a typo, misspell, incorrect information or bad grammar. Seriously, if you want to put your own words so badly, put your own damn screenshots up.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 00:58, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Your screenshot descriptions read like a filing cabinet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:40, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
Then like I said previously, put up your own damn screenshots--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 13:20, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:This is a wiki. The point of a wiki is collaborative editing. As stated in the [[Rules,_Standards_and_Principles#IMFDB_is_an_information_resource.2C_not_our_private_playground | Rules, Standards and Principles]], ''"IMFDB is an information resource, not our private playground."'' --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 13:48, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:And besides, if you take a look at the bottom of the edit window, you'll see it reads: '''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.''' So... yeah. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:12, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:If you're going to get this precious about your screenshots, then don't bother uploading them at all. While IMFDB does have a certain unwritten concept of "uploader's privilege" it does not extend to captions that sound like they were sent in Morse code and don't match the way the other captions already on the page are written and formatted. Also, lose the attitude or you'll be getting some time out. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:50, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::Unless the map or game mode is important to the image, which it usually is not, it should be left out. As for the rest of your captions, I have no problem with what you put, just the map/gamemode doesn't belong here. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:38, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Fine fine. I didn't know you were an admin so don't ban me just to prove you can. Sorry if I sounded a little terse, but it is annoying having your words re-written constantly. But just one last thing, cause I noticed you mass changed my changes back to what you had, would you mind changing "the player character" to the class? Such as "The US/Russian Engineer in Multiplayer holds the A-91"? (i'll put that screenshot up in a bit)--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:10, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::I mainly do that because the character has no name in multi, it's much easier in single where you can do "Blackburn holds an X." "An engineer holds an X" seems a little awkward in terms of sentence structure; it feels oddly unspecific about the character holding the weapon being the one the player is controlling. I mainly make a deal of saying "the player character holds..." because it annoys me when people say "the player holds..." since the player is either holding a control pad or a mouse. Typically if the player is holding a gun something has gone very badly wrong somewhere along the line. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 01:28, 6 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::[[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] is admin since October 2011, so keep that in mind. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:07, 6 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I didn't know that, congrats! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 02:17, 6 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I just think that it sounds better than just saying "the player character" because it is just extremely generic. That's why I usually just put "weapon with extra extra extra attatched" without putting player character, cause it's obvious there is a player character holding the weapon. And you don't want people to be holding guns in real life? Tsk Tsk. What kinda firearm wiki admin are you? And relating to that, is there a list of site Admins available? Is it in the forum? Cause I know there's at least 5 of you guys floating around here (plus Bunni, but I have never actually seen him post or discuss something in the main wiki) and it'd be nice to know who they are. --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 10:08, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::[[Imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database:Administrators|There you go]]. Overly long page title BTW. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:29, 7 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
As long as you don't edit my post about the PP2000 doing as much damage and throwing pebbles at someones face, that's my gem right there. :p (not like there's anything I can do about if it does get edited) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 13:24, 10 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I won't change it. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 10 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Knife used by Dmitri ==<br />
<br />
Does anyone know what kind of knife was used by Dmitri in the mission "Comrades"? Its the one he uses to cut the wires in the garage to unlock the gates. It looks ... funky and not very utilitarian--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 21:06, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:It's a Spetsnaz machete. [http://www.sovietarmystuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1160] --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 21:25, 5 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:A more in-depth look here: http://interestingswords.com/machete/russian-machete-taiga.html [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 17:10, 8 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Furthering the US Army / USMC mix theory ==<br />
<br />
IRL USMC use neither [[M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System|M26 MASS]] nor [[Heckler & Koch M320|M320 GLM]]. Army does. USMC still use [[M203 grenade launcher|M203 GL]] as UGL. As for hand-held grenade launcher... [[Milkor MGL#MGL 140|M32 MGL]]. Spammy for MP but would have worked for SP (like [[Barrett M82#Barrett M107|M107 LRSR]] did). Thoughts shared. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:40, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Well yeah, and they also don't use the M1A2 Abrams. This seems to be in some nebulous future where the USMC has upgraded all their equipment. Also the M107 was actually pretty stupid since all you did with it was shoot some guys on the other side of a courtyard with a non-magnifying scope. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:44, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Gotta say, upgrading equipment in the future one 'A' more doesn't seem as excessive as with entirely new one... But yeah, it's still upgrade. Like, say, giving the future US Army the USMC [[Beretta 92 pistol series#Beretta M9A1|M9A1]].<br />
::Heh, that's the wrong mission they put M107 in. Is there any USMC mission where the long range capabilities of M107 would have served better? (Here I'm starting to think of those sniper missions in '''CoD 4''' and '''MoH''') --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:12, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::I think the best mission to have the M107 in would have been "Rock and a Hard Place," there's a lot of range in that valley. Perhaps even let you pick off officers directing things at the rear so fewer vehicles would show up. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:38, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::In Operation Swordbreaker I sorta hoped you'd get a chance for some M107 urban action from a sniper point, taking out PLR Insurgents from afar. I'd thought big anti-material plus big city with lots of cover, be a perfect role for an Anti-Material sniper, alas it was used against you rather than use from you. Instead you just got a Mk. 11. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 11:14, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Yeah, I was sad the M107 wasn't put to better use, it's the only time it appears in the ENTIRE game. The only I thing I didn't like in the SP. :( - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:31, 9 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::An LRSR mission with the Barrett like the one in CoD4 would have been awesome to have in BF3. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:35, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
http://www.battlefield.com/images/bf3-hooah :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:02, 13 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Holy crap, I thought that was a real Marine in that pic at first! :O [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:35, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Just some silliness ==<br />
<br />
I didn't feel like uploading tons of screens for the page today so I'll put these up just for fun.<br />
[[Image:BF3-Falcon Kick!.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Falcon Kick!''']]<br />
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''Damn, those alien bastards are gonna pay for shooting up my ride.''']]<br />
[[Image:BF3-Duke Nukem-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|'''I'm gonna kick your ass, bitch!''']]<br />
- [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:00, 10 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Would be cool if the kick could actually have been used as a combat move like in '''F.E.A.R.''' or '''Mirror's Edge''' (also made by EA DICE) :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:42, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:More pictures with included silliness are always welcome to me :D If we could make pictures with captions as hilarious as the ones on the Far Cry 2 page, I would always come to the BF3 page whenever I'm in a bad mood xD -- Long Fallen 22:11, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, the Far Cry 2 page is the best page ever created! :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:46, 12 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Wait, how do you kick? [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:37, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::You can't kick, this animation only happens when your character vaults over a low lying object, like a guardrail or a rock. -- Long Fallen 22:44, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Dammit. I am disappoint. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:46, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Current Page Status / More Images ==<br />
<br />
It's amazed me how long the game's been out yet there's still not very many images of all the weapons :/<br />
<br />
I've unlocked all the multiplayer weapons, but unfortunately don't have a capture card for my PS3, which I think is moot since most of the current images look like they were taken on the PC's level of detail.<br />
<br />
As of right now I love the current format the MP7's listing is in, showing off the accessories it can mount at one time, while also showing off each part of the reload animation. It would also be nice if each listing had the weapon's simple ironsights as the first image, or vice versa. <br />
<br />
Either way, we need to make this image complete :D A game like this doesn't deserve to have such a barren imfdb page... -- Long Fallen 22:40, 11 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It's because the game's too fun to take the time to do it ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:43, 12 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== HK53 ==<br />
<br />
Is it only on the 360 version where the HK53 is, for some reason, referred to as the G53? And for some reason it comes standard with a 12x ballistic scope. It's quite amusing, the scope is as long as the gun. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 03:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:It's called G53 on PC as well. [[User:Ramell|Ramell]]<br />
::I think the 12x is a bugged accessory, that's usually only available on those weapons for DICE Employees [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 06:01, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::HK53 on PS3, hence that screenshot. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:12, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::I had assumed that DICE didn't get the rights to use "HK" because in the description for all other HK guns they are referred to as "made by a German weapons manufacturer". Strange that PS3 uses the "HK".--[[User:--JazzBlackBelt--|--JazzBlackBelt--]] 12:44, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:12x Ballistic Scope? Can you take a screenshot and post it here? :D --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::lol sorry, I don't know the first thing about taking screenshots. I'm sure someone else here could get a screenshot. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:30, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::All the BTK guns have the DICE-only attachments unlocked by default, that is to say, all the ones you're never supposed to get. If you want screen shots I'd get them in the next month or less as they'll probly get rid of them in the next patch. 12x Scope: FAMAS, L85A2, HK53, QBZ-95B, QBB-95, MG36. Flash Suppressor: QBU-88, L96. Suppressor: Jackhammer. Note that for the Jackhammer the suppressor doesn't appear on the model in first or third person, the stats don't change, and I'm pretty sure the sound doesn't either, so really, it doesn't exist. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 10:04, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::DICE-only? Cheating Campers >:O<br />
:::HK53 and QBZ-95B with ballistic scope - would be funny to see :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:33, 17 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== "Realistic" ==<br />
<br />
Does it annoy the hell out of anyone else when people talk about how "realistic" BF3 is, specifically compared to MW3? Yes, DICE did a much better job on the modeling and it does have a more realistic ballistics engine, but come on. Every soldier carries around an infinitely reusable parachute? People run around with defibrillators to instantly revive teammates? Somehow the Support class fits an infinite amount of ammo for every caliber in his pocket? Then, of course, every single soldier is trained to use every jet, helicopter and tank, and the jets can be used as taxis with wing mounted seating. Don't get me wrong, these are all things that add to the enjoyment of the game, and they work really well as game mechanics, but not even remotely realistic. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 06:22, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:They call it realistic because using the word "verisimilitude" makes people think you're trying to look clever for the sake of it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:27, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, some aspects of the game are unrealistic, but think about it though. Would you really want to play a game where you run out of ammo ever 5 minutes and have to run around and just wait to die or hope you knife someone to take his weapons, and then hope he too hasn't run out of ammo? Or would you want to have to go through a Gran Turismo-esque license course to be able to use every vehicle properly? While some things are clearly over-the-top, I won't argue with that, some things are obviously put in for the gameplay value, for enjoyment. IF the developers truly wanted a realistic game, they'd have the disc eject and destroy itself after you die. Though the defibrillator comment reminded me of something my friend said, "Oh, you come back to life after getting hit directly with a tank shell! Oh here, let me revive this oatmeal!" [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 20:49, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Googling "Battlefield 3 is too realistic" and getting matching results is kinda funny. For some interesting comparisons: [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FacklerScaleOfFPSRealism Fackler Scale of FPS Realism] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:28, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::As an airsofter I find it that list really funny. Classic: All FPSs / Realistic: Airsoft :D Seriously though, what I look for when I think realism is things that work how they do in real life, how they have to work, not whether they normally are or should be used in that way. BF3 is rare in that it has the following: Tac and normal reloads all done right, one in the chamber, iron sights and optics lined up/used properly, all fire modes that should be on any weapon present, switching modes does not change the gun's stats (ie switching to semi makes gun more powerful) just the mode, damage (which can never be considered fully realistic) at a reasonable level and based on the calibre, bullet travel time and drop. Now, whether the Marines have the right weapons, vehicles, or camo, and stuff like that comes second to me, because even if they don't use a certain camo, they ''could'' as opposed to one in the chamber, which '''has''' to funtion like that. Russian soldiers don't use, say SG 553s, QJY-88s, or Jackhammers, but they could, and more importantly I can, because first and foremost in mulitplayer I'm me. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 09:58, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Well, things like single reload animation, no +1 round in the chamber, fixed firing mode, hitscan, etc. are usually the result of engine limitations. In this regard we can see that [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite-2 Frostbite 2 Engine] is more advanced than [http://www.moddb.com/engines/frostbite Frostbite 1 Engine] (which already had bullet physics; although magcount and overheating from [http://www.moddb.com/engines/refractor-2 Refractor 2 Engine] are absent; it would have also been nice if there were interchangeable magazines). Regarding the equipment it shows how much there [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch didn't do the research] and [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShownTheirWork shown their work]. Me wants [[Project Reality]] for BF3 :| --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:02, 17 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I'm not saying that it isn't realistic in some specific areas, sure it is, but it's a video game, and to compare it to COD and say BF is more realistic is kind of like comparing Star Trek to Star Wars and saying Star Trek is more realistic because they used the word "tachyon". That being said, I think all four examples I just used are very evertaining. [[User:Animalmenace|Animalmenace]] 04:56, 16 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Javelins are the best. ==<br />
<br />
Javelin + CITV station on a tank = fantastic combination. The top down fire mode makes killing LAVs and Amtraks, especially on Noshair (sp?) Canals easy, not to mention the massively amusing ability to fire on laser painted aircraft. It's always hilarious to watch an FA/18 blow up and the guy flying just sees FGM-148 Javelin killed him and he wonders what just happened. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 02:22, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Oh my, sounds like tracer darting in BC2 o_O --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:56, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::And CITV Station + MBT Guided Shells! Lock, fire, triple kill on one Little Bird! Lock, fire, quad on the other. I was 7/0 20 seconds into the game! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:14, 18 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's even better against a jet. I just try to imagine the expression on a pilot's face as he wonders how the hell an Abrams just shot down his Flanker. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The Javelins may be the best, however, setting up the SOFLAM is akin to setting yourself up with giant neon lights pointing "I'M RIGHT HERE!" to the enemies. I'm sure DICE had good intentions when programming it so that it wouldn't be ridiculously common and spammy, but it just sort of defeats the point of giving it to the stealthy ninja that the Recon class should be. Not to mention it gets even less useful on Wake Island with the mobile AA guns shooting the bright red light visible from just about any distance with the fury of a thousand angry Russians armed with PPSh's. :/ -- Long Fallen 22:32, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Oh, the Tunguska, which has the ability of firing every bullet ever made at the same time?[[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 22:49, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Haha, is there any other? -- Long Fallen 01:26, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== 9K22 Tunguska ==<br />
<br />
I've actually just realized that while the page is mostly (half) complete, the 9K22 Tunguska's armaments haven't been added to the page; because I'd like to know exactly how much ammunition for its guns it carries and approximately for how long would it waste it all before running out, since it's a mobile AA platform? -- Long Fallen 01:36, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Ammunition capacity is 1,904, combined rate of fire is variable between 3,900 and 5,000 rounds per minute, so if we take the lower rate of fire this works out to about 30 seconds of continuous firing. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:45, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::[[Image:2a38m.jpg|thumb|none|400px|2A38M Autocannon - 30x165mm]]<br />
::Example image in case anyone feels like adding. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:36, 22 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Added a piece of info about the M1014 ==<br />
<br />
It's really inaccurate for even a shotgun. I've patterned my shotgun in real life which also has a cylinder bore and the pattern was half the size of the pattern in game. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 12:46, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:This "short-range shotgun" problem is sadly common in video games, to the point which the TVTropes website has a page just for it. And Frag-12 rounds for the shotguns in this game are horribly overpowered too. I'd take a tighter pattern with a realistic damage-drop-off with distance with buckshot if they could tone down the Frag-12 rounds. For a more realistic shotgun, try playing SWAT 4. You can actually snipe somewhat well with a Benelli Nova in that game if you crouch and wait to become fully accurate.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:55, 21 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:SWAT4... It's the same game that also has handgun sniping and guns that do less damage at point blank range. I was disappointed with the 1911 in that game sadly. :( I'd be careful advising anyone to play that game; its mechanics are ungodly finicky. -- Long Fallen 22:23, 21 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::You could snipe with handguns in Battlefield 2 too... That was actually a tactic employed by experienced BF2 snipers: shoot the enemy with bolt-action sniper rifle and then immediately switch to pistol and finish him off ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:20, 22 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Meh, SWAT 4 isn't as finicky with its mechanics if you know what you're doing. The damage with its guns is somewhat random to reflect how bullets in real life don't always perform as expected (i.e., JHPs clog with clothing and fail to expand, 5.56mm FMJ fails to fragment once inside a target if the bullet isn't properly constructed or the barrel it's fired from is too short, etc.). though I will admit that the M1911 and other .45 ACP guns are underpowered in that game. But I think the reason as to why "handgun sniping" has persisted up until now is that modelling ballistic physics for bullets en masse was only possible when the right programming and hardware appeared. The BF2 example was probably implemented as well given the limited draw distance of the engine; without an omnipresent zoom system to represent how your eyes can focus on far-off objects (like in ARMA 2) the limitations of pixels on our monitors means that enemies become unrecognizable jumbles of pixels at distances we would still be able to clearly see them in real life. Also, because adjustable sights are hard to model in games (as opposed to scopes with ballistic drop markings), pistols often don't have ballistic drop either. I tried compensating for ballistic drop while shooting pistols in the STALKER series--because the iron sights on pistols can't be adjusted it's very difficult, since essentially the muzzle will obscure your target when you aim high to compensate. <br />
<br />
:But the sooner we get realistic shotgun buckshot spreads and ranges in games, the better. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:02, 22 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The problem is, the zoom system only activates when you press a button. So any time you don't, the environment is presented in its distant form. This gives an edge to the person who secured a position and now zooms in in the enemy direction, while the enemy is on the move and can't see said person. In reality, they should see each other evenly. I like this absence of bionic eyes in [[Project Reality]]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:26, 23 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:So you have to hold down the button in ARMA2 to focus on distant objects? Well, a toggle system would be much better (probably combined with using a "dynamic zoom" system that used your mouse wheel or two keys to zoom in and out so you could vary the amount of zoom much like your eyes can focus across a great deal of ranges). Still, given the pixellation problem that I mentioned earlier, all PCs in Project Reality have to carry binoculars so as to focus on distant targets, but these cannot be combined with weaponry, so if you're using a kit that has no optics for your gun and are trying to hit something that you can't really see unmagnified (even though in real life you would be able to see and hit a target at that distance), tough luck. Project Reality is also going in the process of making a version based on the ARMA2 engine as well. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 18:17, 23 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Adjustable Zoom would be nice. Sadly, developers haven't yet caught the idea. Even adjustable FOV is not in every modern shooter (and where it is, it might be limited).<br />
::It works both ways in PR: you have problems seeing an enemy in the distance and an enemy has problems seeing you ;) And yes, I'm aware of PR for ArmA II. [http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-reality-arma2 It's currently v0.1], right at the starting line. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:47, 24 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M1014 magazine tube length ==<br />
<br />
Can someone explain to me what's going on with the magazine tube length of the M1014 in-game? The weapon art models show the typical length, but in-game, the magazine length looks like a M3. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 13:12, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
The pump action shotguns in the game start with four round mag tubes. Therefore the art models depict them as such. However, when you unlock "Extended Magazines", the in world model changes to the six round tube for both the Remington and the Benelli.--[[User:GLOCK10mil|GLOCK10mil]] 16:18, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Didn't think of that. Thank you. --[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 17:03, 27 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== UMP trigger group ==<br />
<br />
It seems the world model for the H&K UMP has safe, semi-auto, and full auto, even though the in-game weapon operates with a selectable 2-round burst.--[[User:Baztian|Baztian]] 14:53, 28 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:If that's true than it is an error, though the UMP ''can'' have a full/2/semi/safe trigger group. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 16:32, 28 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Back To Karkand Weapons ==<br />
<br />
So I've been playing B2K a lot, and I've gathered a bunch of trivia about some of the guns that could be added to the page, but I'm not so knowledgable about them so I thought I'd leave them here so someone who knows more can add them into the page.<br />
<br />
The L85A2 has three round burst as well as auto and semi, which as far as I know it doesn't in real life. It also can't mount the M320 which, again as far as I know, is the grenade launcher it mounts in real life. It's also 'cocked' by pressing a bolt release just above the magwell.<br />
<br />
The FAMAS also has burst as well as semi and auto, again I don't know if this is true in real life.<br />
<br />
Both the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B and burst as well as automatic and semi, but I'll admit I know nothing about these weapons. The QBZ-95B and the QBU-88 are reloaded similarly to the AN94/AEK-971 (new mag is used to push the mag release and then inserted) and it looks absolutely bizarre in first person because they're bullpup.<br />
<br />
Also, the QBB-95 and the QBZ-95B are chambered in 5.45x39mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm and the QBU-88 is chambered in 7.62x54mm under the info screen rather than 5.8x42mm.<br />
<br />
That's all I've got [[User:Nikonov|Nikonov]] 18:17, 9 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The FAMAS does have all three, and a lot of the info screens are wrong or somewhat wrong, pretty sure they're just copy-pasting errors as opposed to them not knowing the calibre. Everything else you said is correct as far as I know. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 20:34, 9 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Well, if they are copy-pasting errors then someone should tweet Demize about it ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:10, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The reload animation for those Chinese rifles doesn't use the magazine to push the old mag out. The character pulls out a new mag and pulls the old one out with just his fingers but has the magazine in hand to load into the gun right after. I saw a video of it with an AK once.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:49, 9 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I'm assuming DICE watched this video, I don't have a clue if this is what they teach in the PLA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk--[[User:Mattatack92|Mattatack92]] 00:40, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:IRL L85A2 mounts not [http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/products/m320/lg_m320_3.jpg M320] but a different variant of AG36, called [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/Black_Hawk_169/DSC00005.jpg UGL]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:07, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I just Tweeted Demize about the calibre and ROFs being sometimes wrong for the BTK guns. :) Also, he says he's not going to add the HK79 and GL1 due to memory issues, which is fair. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:16, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::That would make a nice "GL Pack" DLC though: GL1, HK79, M203, UGL... And more, should the carbines get corresponding rifle variants :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Also interesting, the QBZ-95's ironsights glitch when you fire. Actually helps. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:23, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I don't have a Twitter, could someone suggest something small on the HUD on hardcore modes that show what fire mode your gun is set to? I change it a lot and the guns with three settings make it difficult.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:43, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I agree, and Tweeted :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:56, 11 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Would be kind of cool if in hardcore mode you could actually look down at your weapon and see the fire selector or check how many rounds are in the magazine. If you think having no HUD is "hardcore," just imagine having to actually worry about taking your eyes off the battleground long enough to check on your weapon like that. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:14, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Pancor Jackhammer ==<br />
<br />
Why? Not only is this weapon relatively pointless since they included the USAS-12 (it seems to recoil less and that's about it) but it comes with a freaking suppressor. Of all the useless devices you can equip to a weapon as insanely loud as the Jackhammer theoretically would be, this and an under-barrel can opener would just about top the list. (I presume they put it on there because the revolving magazine system of the Jackhammer has some similarities to that of a Nagant M1895.) Also, why in the hell is the freaking thing even in the game? There's supposedly a grand total of two of the dumb things in existence. If we're going to throw in an automatic shotgun prototype that never made it into production, how about the H&K CAWS? That one was actually tested by the US military. In another world, it could have been adopted. Or, hell, the Atchisson AA-12. Don't get me wrong, the Jackhammer is a cool looking gun, but it never made it off the design bench and I'm a ''little'' tired of seeing it crop up in video games claiming at least some level of real world veracity (the world "realistic" is a silly one to use for FPS games). [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 03:24, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:It's supposed to be for the nostalgia, I guess, since it was an unlockable in BF2. Much like them keeping that "DAO-12" name for the Protecta, though it's now a Street Sweeper. There were actually quite a few Jackhammer prototypes, but only two that fired fullauto. Or rather didn't, which is why there were only two. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:They will put XM8 as military tested weapon, methinks. CAWS was pretty cool gun in [[Jagged Alliance 2]] :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:52, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::As stated, it's in because it was in BF2, that's the point of the Back To Karkand pack. Also, it doesn't actually have a suppressor. Well, it does, but it's invisible and does not change any stats whatsoever, not even making you not appear on the minimap. So, there's just a pretend option for a suppressor. Why? Same reason the two ARs, two Carbines, and two MGs have 12x scopes, and the two Sniper Rifles have Flash Suppressors: it was an oversight, those are the attachments you're supposed to ''never'' get those attachments, only DICE gets them, because they're silly. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 14:10, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Well the suppressor actually does do something, it cuts damage down. I actually like the Pancor though, with frag rounds, ext mags, and a Holo sight I can clear out most hallways on metro. But, that is pretty much the only map it is of any use on.-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 16:47, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::Oh geez, way for me to miss the obvious. I forgot about it being in BF2, having not played the "older" games in quite a while. (Why does 2005 seem so long ago?) Actually, I was a little sad that B2K didn't include the option to hijack semi-trucks and civilian cars like you could with the Armored Fury booster pack. At least you can borrow a Bobcat on Wake Island and try to run enemy soldiers down with it for nothing other than sheer comedy value... And the other "weird" attachments (okay, maybe not the flash suppressor) are at least ''sort of'' useful. You can be extremely annoying with the MG36 fitted with a 12x - no sniper likes dodging nearly-accurate long range machine gun fire, and anything that snipers don't like is fine with me. [[User:Atypicaloracle|Atypicaloracle]] 04:26, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Dog Tag Weapons ==<br />
I vote we add a section either at the bottom of the page for all of them, or at the end of each class of weapons for them, because there are a LOT of guns on dog tags that aren't actually in the game. (SAA, SCAR-L, proper MG36, standard FAMAS, that weird suppressed Makarov PM variant, M203, and lots more) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:25, 26 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:If no one objects to this, I'm going to create a sub-catagory at the bottom of each weapon class (SMG, shotgun, etc) that has all the Dog Tag-only weapons, because this page will get very confusing if we don't, as none of those weapons are in the game, just pictures of them. So far (of the top of my head) Makarov PB, Single Action Army, M1911A1, SPAS-12, SCAR-L, FAMAS (standard), M203, M16A2, M16A1, MG36 (proper). I'm sure there are more, but that's what I can think of right now. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 15:45, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::I've added everything I know of, but there are probably more. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:46, 8 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Patch is still yet to reach Xbox it appears ==<br />
<br />
It appears as though the Xbox has been forgotten since the AN 94 still just has two fire modes and the HK416 still has it's three fire modes. Does anyone know more about it than me? --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 17:59, 17 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, we never got that patch that the other two platforms did. I'm assuming it'll be rolled into the patch that was originally supposed to come out for all platforms this month, but is now going to be in March at the earliest. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:57, 18 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Nope, here on the PS3 it's still the same, three-mode HK416 and two-mode AN94. DICE has gone on to say that across all consoles the stats are very different; however, the next patch will put all weapons on equal ground across all platforms. -- Long Fallen 02:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== All Fancy Right Side Dog Tags ==<br />
I'm going to add this to the page soon, to replace the Dog Tag Weapons sections I made before, but right now I need sleep. They're sorted by the name of the real weapon in game, not in game name and not name of weapon in the picture, if those are different. If any of you can figure out what the not-actually-a-QBB-95 is, let me know :/ [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
[[Image:BF3_500KillGuns.jpg|thumb|none|650px]]<br />
<br />
:You have no idea how grateful I am to see this in a neat compilation! Been looking everywhere for just these designs to no avail. -- Long Fallen 02:46, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
I think the QBB-95 is a totally made up frankengun. However the core of it is actually an Enfield L85, you can tell by the vent holes on the receiver: 3 horizontal vents at the rear, then a slightly larger gap followed by two slightly smaller vents. Also visible is the raised portion on the bottom edge of the upper receiver which runs horizontally under these vent holes, and the pistol grip and trigger guard seem to match. On top it seems to be a grossly oversized M4/M16A4 detachable carry handle, and the front is anyone's guess. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:56, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
::Yeah, I think you're right. It also has the generic bipod most guns in BF3 use, Harris Bipod I think it's called. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:45, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Flash Suppresor ==<br />
I know this is really not important and probably no one cares, but I think the flash suppresor may be a Vltor VC-1. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] 17:15, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:You found it! :D [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:28, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not important? Any info is very welcome on this site! In fact, I was wondering this myself. -- Long Fallen 02:48, 2 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, most definitely. We welcome clarification on any component or add-on used in the game. IMFDB's priorities are much different than those of game-based wikis. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:31, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Do you guys think we should have a section for the attachments in the game, since there are so many? For most games it wouldn't be necessary, but here there are 12 different optics, the aftermarket irons, KAC foregrip, Harris bipod, six (I think) suppressors, PEQ-2, pistol laser sight, and a tac light. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:53, 15 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Yes, please include the info on which flash suppressors and other accessories are being used on which guns in the screenshots (as well as an addendum at the end of the page outlining just which real-life firearm accessories are in the game). There are many of us not in the know who would like to learn about them. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 01:32, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== 3 Expansions planned for BF3 ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2012/03/07/battlefield-3-close-quarters-announced.aspx 3 Expansions planned for BF3]<br />
<br />
Newest expansion has 10 new guns, what are you guys thinking/hoping they will be? I'm hoping for a USP, perhaps another pump action shotgun,maybe a TAR or a Galil, and an XM8 (wishful thinking on that last one, but they put the Jackhammer in, so why not?) [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 18:20, 7 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
EDIT: Can someone fix that link please? I'm not very good at this clearly.<br />
<br />
Me being the AR fanboy that I am, I just want a short barreled AR (10 inches prefferably). cheech98 9:28, 7 March 2012<br />
<br />
:HK416. I'd like to see another pump shotty and some pistols at the least. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:49, 7 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Already spoken for; the M416 is the 10" 416.[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 18:16, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Definitely a pump shotgun, maybe an Ithica or a Mossberg with wood furniture (because with black furniture it would look too much like the 870). I would like to see an AK in 7.62x39. I was honestly appalled that BF3 didn't feature a .30 cal AK. An MP5, a Hi-Power, a CZ-75 and a SIG-Sauer would also be nice; a non-tacticool FAL, maybe an FNC (always loved that gun), a Skorpion (come on, who doesn't wanna shoot that thing in a video game), the VZ-58, the HK P7 perhaps? The HK33 would be an awesome weapon to see (although admittedly not too plausible), an Uzi (full size or mini, doesn't really matter to me), a Makarov (still common among the Russian Armed Forces, right?), the P99, and MORE REVOLVERS, DAMMIT. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 02:04, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:Yeah, I think if they added the FAL, it wouldn't be tacticool, seeing as how the G3A3 wasn't. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 1:32, 11 March 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
:Rumours are circulating that two such weapons in Close Quarters Pack are the CZ-75 Automatic is one such pistol as a competition towards the G18 and 93R and a new sniper rifle, the CZ-750 for the Recon. Also two new vehicles rumored are the UH-60 Blackhawk and M2A2 Bradley IFV. [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:07, 9 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::But isn't the CQ Pack gonna take place entirely indoors? I'm pretty sure it said somewhere that the four maps in the next pack are going to feture entirely infantry-based, indoors combat. I guess I could see a helicopter working in there somewhere (thinking of the Airport map's chopper-gunners on MW2, I suppose) but it seems like vehicles would break the tense, room-to-room air they're going for here. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 3:56, 13 March 2012 (EST)<br />
<br />
The HK33 is actually in the game already, in the Back to Karkand expansion pack as the 'G53' or something like that. *EDIT* Nevermind, you meant the full size rifle, my mistake...<br />
--[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 12:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
It's gonna be a bunch of CQB guns, no doubt. I'd like to see (Assault Rifles) Tavor TAR-21 and the Masada. (Carbines) AKMs and the AUG A3. (Machine Guns) LSAT and the IMI Negev (Snipers) VSS Vintorez and the DSR-1 (Submachine Guns)MP5 PDW and the Colt R0991 9mm. --[[User:Commander Lukas|Commander Lukas]] 16:28, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year, I think we are going to have our hands full identifying all them because it ain't just firearms either, they're adding a slew of vehicles with each pack as is the norm with this supposed DLC's. "Close quarters" I think is mostly gonna be all transport vehicles so I suspect, possibly Technicals, Civilian Vehicles, maybe an aerial transport helicopter/plane or light attack scout helicopters, possibly light IFV's too. Weapons are likely to be CQB in nature, I'm hoping for alot of Sub-Machine Gun's and Shotguns, the game needs more Pump Shotguns in my opinion. My general wish-list includes:<br />
<br />
* SA58 OSW Battle Rifle and Type 95 Assault Rifle (to round out the Chinese Firepower in BF3, almost the full collection now) for the Assault Kit<br />
* Zastava M92 (Compact AK47 Variant) and the Mark 18 Mod 0 (Ultra compact AR) and possibly the QLZ-87 Automatic Grenade Launcher (as an Anti-Vehicle Weapon, replaces the Rocket Launcher) for the Engineer<br />
* MG3 GPMG and L86A2 (Equivalent to BF3's RPK and M27, gotta have more weapons like those for the Support Kit)<br />
* Mark 12 SPR (American equivalent of the SKS in BF3) and CZ-750 for the Recon<br />
* CZ-75 Auto, H&K MP5, Mossberg 590 Pump Shotgun (if it was a secondary for the Assault I'd be in love with it), TOZ-194, Valtro PM-5, Sawn Off Double Barrel, Benelli M3 Super 90, Smith & Wesson 686, SIG P226, H&K USP, QSZ-92 and FN Five SeveN are just some examples of all kit weapons I'd love to see. <br />
<br />
[[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 10:56, 9 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:If they added the QLZ-87, it would be '''''WAY''''' overpowered. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 7:28, 12 March 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
:Dunno about the QLZ-87, man. I'd think most Battlefield players are already sick of overpowered, hand-held weapons that can auto-fire frags. [[User:Sopher|Sopher]] 4:03, 13 March 2012 (EST)<br />
<br />
"There's gonna be AT least 30 weapons or more tops in each of the three packs over a period of this year"<br/><br />
Thirty weapons in each pack? Are you kidding me? BtK had eight weapons. And how do you know all the packs will have weapons in?[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 12:37, 9 March 2012 (CST)<br />
:Actually, BtK had ten weapons, and he meant at least 30 overall, he just stated it wrong. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 3:28, 9 March 2012 (PST)<br />
<br />
They just released a new trailer that shows off some of the weapons in the first expansion pack, I only saw two but there may be more hidden throughout, the ones I saw were the L86A1 and the ACR(I assume it was the ACR, it was however called "ACW-R", I'm seeing a trend with Magpul weapons here with the PDR being renamed the PDW-R. (PS. sorry if I screwed up the formatting, this is my first entry.)<br />
After further searching the complete list seems to be AUG, SPAS-12, ACW-R(ACR), L86A1 LSW, LSAT, MTAR-21, SCAR-L. However some people claim to have spotted the CZ-75 Auto. [[User:Spry|Spry]] 12:38, 13 March 2012 (CET)<br />
<br />
:Good catch Spry, I watched the trailer twice carefully and found the same. I'll make it a list so it's easier to see. As with Karkand we should avoid adding anything new to the main page until we have more to add. I'm assuming the same weapon layout as Karkand until I hear something solid about that full auto CZ-75, maybe it has a stock and is a PDW? I'm also assuming what go to what classes, can't really go wrong there. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 11:47, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
*Assault: SCAR-L (misspelled as SCARL-L; I tweeted Demize)<br />
*Assault: AUG (variant unknown)<br />
*Engineer: ACR (as ACW-R, like PDW-R)<br />
*Engineer: MTAR-21<br />
*Support: L86A1<br />
*Support: LSAT<br />
*Recon: HK417 (as M417, like M416)<br />
*Recon: ???<br />
*All Kit: "M5K" (don't know what it is, described as M5K tactical machine pistol)<br />
*All Kit: SPAS-12<br />
<br />
LIST EDITED<br />
<br />
::I'm excited to see the AUG and the MTAR, but the ACR and SCAR-L... while I have nothing against them (in fact, I really like them) aren't they a bit... implausible? As for the LSAT... HELL. NO. [[User:ManchurianCandidate|ManchurianCandidate]] 19:15, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Not sure if this is on the up and up, but people are talking about the Recon weapons being the HK417 and the CZ-750 (these are were supposedly found buried in some code in a leaked beta build), and with both of these weapons having an effective range of about a thousand meters, this seems plausible. However others are claiming there will be no Recon weapons in this expansion, which seems like it would a stupid move on DICE's part. In addition people are saying the ACR will be a carbine with a 25+1 capacity, and that the SCAR-L will be the assault rifle weapon (seems odd to have a the 7.62 variant as a carbine and the 5.56 variant as an assault rifle, but oh well). Others say the second All Kit weapon will be something called an M5K? I'm not sure what that is. Again none of this was shown in the trailer, however some people claim to have seen the CZ-750 in the trailer, but it's such a poor view that it could just as well be the SV-98. Also, BF3 fans work fast, someone made these mock ups of the stats screens for the guns: http://imgur.com/a/iOlAQ [[User:Spry|Spry]] 03:08, 14 March 2012 (CET)<br />
<br />
::::After thinking about it a bit, I'm starting to think the M5K is meant to be the MP5K, when you consider that they've renamed a couple of H&K weapons like the HK53 and the HK416, it's plausible that they had some licensing issues with H&K like they seem to have had with Magpul and Glock (No surprise there, considering how notoriously protective Glock is of their brand), So they probably just renamed it the M5K. [[User:Spry|Spry]] 10:29, 14 March 2012 (CET)<br />
:::::Either that, or they misspelled it, like they did the SCAR-L. And if the MP5 doesn't have H&K's name in its name, they probably wouldn't have to rename it. [[User:Jeddostotle7|Jeddostotle7]] 7:18, 14 March 2012 (PST)<br />
::::::You also have to take into account that some of the weapons used by said classes in the trailer could just be kits they picked up in the middle of the battle, perhaps to throw off the assertion of which one belongs to who. I'm just glad the L86A1 is in there, finally another British weapon added, just add a Browning Hi-Power or a SIG P226 and I'm set! [[User:Draco122|Draco122]] 14:38, 14 March 2012 (CDT)Draco122<br />
<br />
An M203A2 would be a nice addition, since the Marines don't use the M320. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:12, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
I thought this belonged here, since we're on the subject of expansions, here's a HUGE list of updates in this upcoming patch.<br />
<br />
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/#!/bf3/news/view/2832654779195992365/ [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 01:56, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
"Recon: HK417 (as M417, like M416)" TAKE MY MONEY ALREADY. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 05:59, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== L96 Irons?! ==<br />
<br />
What in the holy hell is that garbage?! finally a rifle with good iron sights and the stick a SECOND front sight on the end of the receiver rail... for a whopping 7" sight radius... dear god what a disappointment. [[User:Furious Oyster|Furious Oyster]]<br />
:As a side note, that isn't an L96 front sight, looks more like the one that is on the G22 (German variant of the AWM). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:39, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::Hahaha, that was my reaction too. The sights will be fixed in that big patch that should be out this month. It was on that huge notes list. EDIT: I think the BF3 rifle IS the G22; folding stock & front sight. [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/G22_ohne_Schalldaempfer.jpg here][[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:55, 16 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:[[File:AI AW G22.jpg|thumb|400px|none|G22 - .300 Winchester Magnum]]<br />
<br />
: question on the L96, what is it chambered in? It should be .300 Winchester Magnum (I think?) but the ingame description says 7.62mmx51mm NATO... [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 00:03, 21 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::The standard Arctic Warfare is chambered in either .243 Winchester or 7.62x51mm NATO. However, the in game gun is modelled on a magnum rifle (can tell by the size of the magazine) which is chambered in .300 Winchester of .338 Lapua. The caliber is correct for the name of the gun, but wrong for the model it actually is. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:00, 21 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Keep in mind most of the calibres are wrong for the Back To Karkand guns, like the QBs being 5.45mm [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:40, 21 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Shortcuts ==<br />
<br />
I was on the 360 Marketplace this week, looking for new Add-ons for any of my games when I came across several for Battlefield 3. They are class specific and cost 560 Microsoft points apiece or you can get the ultimate bundle which includes Air, Ground and Co-Op 'shortcuts' for a whopping 3200 points. What a shortcut entails is basically a free pass to getting ALL of the specific kits weapons, attachments and gadgets thereby bypassing the experience system if someone has the credits. <br />
<br />
In short, this is a noob's wetdream. Personally, I think they should rename the Ultimate Shortcut Bundle to the Ultimate Lazy Bastards Bundle. Thankfully all of the shortcuts have been getting pretty low reviews. Thoughts? --[[User:Bad Boy|Bad Boy]] 16:28, 3 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Wait, it includes weapon attachments? [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 18:24, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Every other game is dumbed down for casual gamers to blow through in an hour. Why is this any different? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:51, 4 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Heckler_%26_Koch_MP5&diff=542304Talk:Heckler & Koch MP52012-04-05T08:25:23Z<p>Masterius: /* MP5KN */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Other Variants or incarnations of the MP5==<br />
[[Image:EODMP5A3rubberprop.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5A3 9x19mm with mounted [[M203 grenade launcher]] 40mm as used by [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]]'s character Jericho Cane in the film ''[[End of Days]]''.]]<br />
[[Image:H&K 94.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch 94 carbine with front pistol grip & barrel jacket]]<br />
[[Image:MP5KA42.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5KA4 - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:H&K_MP54.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP54 earliest prototype of the H&K MP5 - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:P00634.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Screen used prop Heckler & Koch MP5A3 - 9x19mm. This non-firing weapon is verified as screen used from the film ''[[Salt]]''. The gun is constructed of rubber and was used during parts of the barge sequence where the live firing gun was unecessary. This item is currently being sold by [http://www.thegoldencloset.com/ The Golden Closet]; see [http://www.thegoldencloset.com/merchant/merchant.mvc?Session_ID=6ef04a13fbe759cbdcbdc6bc4c4b809f&Screen=PROD&Product_Code=P00634&Store_Code=TGC&search=Salt&offset=0&filter_cat=&PowerSearch_Begin_Only=&sort=&range_low=&range_high= this link].]]<br />
[[Image:P00646.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Screen used prop Heckler & Koch SP89 - 9x19mm. This non-firing plastic prop weapon is verified as screen used from the film ''[[Salt]]''. The replica SP89 was used as a stand in for the virtually identical live firing MP5K used earlier in the sequence and was used onscreen when Winter throws the gun away. The tip was slightly damaged during the throw and is in otherwise good condition. This item is currently being sold by [http://www.thegoldencloset.com/ The Golden Closet]; see [http://www.thegoldencloset.com/merchant/merchant.mvc?Session_ID=6ef04a13fbe759cbdcbdc6bc4c4b809f&Screen=PROD&Product_Code=P00646&Store_Code=TGC&search=Salt&offset=0&filter_cat=&PowerSearch_Begin_Only=&sort=&range_low=&range_high= this link].]]<br />
[[File:HKMP5A3.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5A3 with Surefire Weaponlight and "SD"-style stock]]<br />
[[Image:DayMP5K.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Daisy Airsoft Model 14 Heckler & Koch MP5K - 9x19mm. One of the first ASG.]]<br />
[[Image:HK_MP5SD.png|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5SD3 with a integrated suppressor - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:MP5K-UMP.jpg|thumb|none|401px|Heckler & Koch MP5K-PDW fitted with a [[UMP]]-style stock - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:MP5SD3-with2-round-burst.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5SD3 with additional 2-round burst fire mode.<br>(Note that this weapon '''is not''' an MP5SD6, the SD6 '''must''' feature the 3-round burst option. This trigger group is officially called "2-round burst" by H&K.)]]<br />
[[Image:KACMP5RSRAIL.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5F with Knight's Armament Company rail system - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:JG MP5 RAS.jpg|thumb|none|400px|'''Airsoft''' MP5-RAS by Jing Gong - 6mm BB]]<br />
[[Image:MP5KModified.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5K with SEF trigger group and forward handguard removed - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:H&K-MP5Ksuitcase.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5K in trademark Heckler & Koch suitcase - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[File:SerenityMP5K.jpg |thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5K used in ''[[Serenity]]'' - version with SEF Plastic Trigger Pack and West German 'Waffle pattern' stick magazine - 9x19mm. The LED sight, unfortunately, could not be found to mount on the weapon for the photograph.]]<br />
[[Image:MP5SFA3.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5SFA3 - 9x19mm]]<br />
[[Image:MP5SD1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch MP5SD1 - 9x19mm]]<br />
<br />
==Early MP5 gone==<br />
<br />
As you can tell, I deleted the section on early MP5s, for two reasons:<br />
<br />
(1.) It's unlikely early MP5s appear in movies or TV, simply because those models are quite rare and basically not available outside of Germany. If you go to HKPRO's MP5 page, you can see what the earliest MP5s looked like.<br />
(2.) The pictures were not early MP5s (one was an MP5A2 taken by MPM, which has since been moved to the MP5A2 section, the other was an A3 with a straight mag and older convex-style buttplate).<br />
<br />
If anyone wants to restore it, please just copy and paste the code from an earlier revision; I made some other revisions that are important to keep. Don't undo all of my recent edits. Thanks. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 03:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)<br />
: I've never seen a movie with the original HK54s, so I agree. If someone did want to put it on though, they have it on World Guns. -GM<br />
:: I restored it, for three reasons: 1. I strongly disagree with the conclusion that a weapon has to be common to deserve inclusion. If that was a valid criterion a considerable number of the gun articles/sections on this site never would've been created. 2. The MP-54 is in [[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl]], so what if it's a video game, this site covers those too. 3. People editing ''that'' article take one look at "MP-54" and assume it's a typo, because even if they do their research by looking at ''this'' article, they find no such weapon and so conclude that it doesn't exist. --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 13:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::I checked your page for S.T.A.L.K.E.R. That doesn't look to me like an MP-54; it looks more like a regular MP5A3 with an open front sight. Such sights do exist as after-market accessories for the MP5. However, seeing as it's a game, it could also just be an artistic decision made by the gun modeler. But it's definitely not supposed to be an MP-54; notice it has the wrong rear sight and hand guards for the -54. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
The page for [[Biggles: Adventures in Time]] (1986) mentions "old spec MP5's with staight magazines"; whether they're actual vintage early MP5s, I know not. British television and film productions might well use these guns. I worry about the deletion of the early section; it's going to clumsy to put it back when someone spots an early MP5, and someone ''will'' spot an early MP5 at some point. One will appear in the background of ''[[The Professionals]]'' or ''[[Who Dares Wins]]''; and although it may be true that they are "quite rare and basically not available outside of Germany", this database doesn't exclude German television programmes. I understand that German television has historically not been too keen on guns, but there must have been German cop dramas and television films and indeed theatrical films in the 1970s. -[[User:Ashley Pomeroy|Ashley Pomeroy]] 18:26, 25 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why not put the 'fake' MP5s on the HK94 section?==<br />
It technically runs counter to common practice on IMFDB by putting the gun in the section of the weapon it's 'impersonating' rather than the real section. Case in point. We put fake M16A2s (that are A1s with A2 handguards) in the M16A1 section ... NOT the M16A2 section, even though that is the gun it is impersonating. Why don't we put the appearances of the C&C HK94s in the HK94 section? [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Hmmm, I didn't notice that this wasn't being done. But yes, I agree, all C&C HK94s impersonating MP5s should go in the HK94 section. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
:Pay no attention to what I just edited out, I was being stupid.-protoAuthor<br />
<br />
== Heckler & Koch MP5K's with the foregrips removed ==<br />
<br />
What is the point of MP5K's with the fore grips removed appearing in movies? you don't have a grip, and could burn you hand if you have been shooting<br />
:What? Speak english for me please.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 20:23, 16 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Better?<br />
:Yes. On topic, they are used as if they are machine pistols. Look at the Third Matrix movie page on this site. They are used in that movie. Also, sign your posts by putting four ~ on the end of every message.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 16:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
"Used as if they are machine pistols"? That would still apply even if the MP5Ks had foregrips but were being dual-wielded like in those scenes. In fact, MP5Ks (as opposed to MP5K-PDWs) ''are'' machine pistols, just relatively bulky ones (compared to models like the Glock 18) due to their lack of a buttstock (like the M93 Raffica). --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 14:31, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== SP-10 / MP-10 is also the PXP-10 ==<br />
<br />
Coharie Arms is the current producer of the SP-10 / MP-10 and its model is now designated as the PXP-10 (although the MP-10 designation is still in effect for fully automatic builds). Their are some slight changes since the SP-10 production. Specifically, the texturing was altered and mounting screws were added on the lower foregrip. Additionally, the tint of the plastic may have changed as well. Coharie has recently announced that the tooling is up for sale.<br />
<br />
== U.S. Police MP5 stocks ==<br />
<br />
What is the most common stock type used by U.S. Police departments; the A2 type or the A3 type?<br />
<br />
That is almost impossible to tell. I've seen both in my local, county and State police SWAT teams so both are used in all police department. The better question would be are there any US police department that uses the MP5K? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)<br />
:According to the picture about half way down the page, the Northeast Metro Law Enforcement Council Special Operations Unit in Massachusetts does. [http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=70:hk-in-action-2-a-collection-of-actual-working-teams&catid=18:hk-in-action-series&Itemid=5] --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:39, 1 September 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==MP5F Redundancy?==<br />
<br />
Do we really need a section for the MP5F? It seems highly unlikely that this model would be used in films or television, and visually distinguishing it from an MP5A3 or MP5A5 would be practically impossible. The only external indicator would be the stock, and that can be interchanged with other MP5 variants. The section claims that this model is internally modified to handle high-pressure ammo, which would be irrelevant for a blank-adapted weapon seen on-screen. If you ask me, having a section for the MP5F would be like having a section for the US military's M9 Beretta on the Beretta 92 page. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 19:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:No contest, nuke it. From what I understand unless the gun image came directly from a movie armorer, if the weapon has not appeared in anything than it has no right to be on IMFDB. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 19:50, 19 September 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Just to add, there are actually some other exterior differences other than the stock. If by some miracle you can see the receiver markings on the spine in a movie, they will simply read HK MP5 rather than HK MP5-N. More realistically, you can also tell the difference by the front sling loop. On the original MP5s there is only a sling eye on the left hand side, mounted as the end of a pin. On the MP5F however, there is a sling loop on either side of the barrel, lower than the single loop on the standard MP5s. The original sling loop pin is replaced with a regular pin, and a "saddle" type mount for the sling loops is mounted under the barrel, placing the sling loops level with the centre of the barrel rather than above it as in the original MP5s. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:32, 19 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==MP5/10==<br />
<br />
Could the MP5/10 be fitted with an MP5A3-style telescoping stock? [[User:MrOshimida27|MrOshimida27]] 00:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:: I believe so, I remember seeing MP5/10s with collapsible stocks. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 01:11, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Only the really cool ones :) plus if you google it, the very first picture of one has a telescoping stock. God bless Jeff Cooper and his 10mm. --[[User:Spades of Columbia|Spades of Columbia]] 17:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== MP5K without sights ==<br />
<br />
In a couple of shows (only one I can think of right now is [[Ultimate Force]]) a version of the MP5K can be seen that appears to have no sights aside from a vestigial post at the front, and possibly a simple notch at the back. Anyone know if this was an actual version that was made a or a modification? As a side note, this version was actually used in real life by the British SAS, and can be seen in several "publicity" (for lack of a better term) photos taken during a training exercise.<br />
<br />
Also, does anyone know if the single fire MP5 versions (Not chopped HK94s, but the things with paddle magazine releases and 3-lug muzzles, and with regular SEF or Navy trigger groups just missing the FA position) were ever available to the public as I think I have spotted a couple in something. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:37, 13 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Bloody typical, immediately after I ask the question I find out that it an MP5KA1 (or MP5KA5 with 3 round burst added), and has low profile fixed pistol type sight for use when worn under clothing to prevent snagging. Does this deserve its own entry on the main page, as the visual differances between the K and KA1 are more than the difference between a MP5A2 and MP5A4. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:03, 13 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
[[File:MP5KA1.jpg|thumb|400px|none|MP5KA1]]<br />
[[File:MP5KA5.jpg|thumb|400px|none|MP5KA5 fitted with the bulky old aiming point projector.]]<br />
<br />
:Yes, the MP5KA1 should get its own section, although I'm not sure it's all that common (''[[Ultimate Force]]'' is so far the only media appearance of this variant that I've seen).<br />
<br />
:And to answer your other question: In the U.S., the MP5SF (the semi-only versions) would not be legal for public ownership. The MP5SF is just a standard mil-spec/LE MP5 that has had its lower receiver swapped out for the SF trigger group; any of the burst/auto-fire lowers can be installed quickly, which means that legally, it is still a machine gun. And if it has a short barrel with the attachment lugs, it would also be an SBR (Short-Barreled Rifle). The reason that the HK94 and other MP5 semi-auto clones don't have the paddle mag releases is because the semi-auto lower receiver is permanently attached to the upper so that a select-fire lower can never be installed. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 10:04, 19 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== MP5KN ==<br />
<br />
I think, the gun labeled as "MP5KN" in the MP5K section is just an MP5K fitted with a Navy trigger pack. The real KN has an extended barrel, like the PDW. Anyone agree with this? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 13:53, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:I agree, have been meaning to change it for a while but keep forgetting about it. Below is an actual MP5KN (well not exactly as the only ones in existence were issued to the US Navy, but this one is a Navy lower MP5K that someone has fitted with a rare genuine MP5KN barrel so is as close as you will ever get). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:47, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:[[File:MP5K-N.jpg|thumb|400px|none|MP5KN - 9x19mm]]<br />
<br />
::Rather curious why Heckler & Koch haven't made MP5K with threaded barrel in the first place... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:25, 5 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Suitcase gun ==<br />
<br />
I was looking at the pictures of the MP5's at the top of this page, and the one of the MP5K in the specially-made suitcase got me wondering-wouldn't that be very hard to aim properly? No iron sights, firing from the shin...and who uses it anyway? CIA, MI6, FSD (I think that's the Russian security service). And say you wanted to buy one, where would you buy it? I doubt from a normal H&K weapons shop. And how much would it even cost, assuming it hasn't been banned in loads of places? Why has this even been made? I mean, I am very interested in guns-that-don't-look-like-guns. I just wonder, have there been suitcase guns before this? If so, did anyone ever actually use them, and can legally talk about it? Can anyone else tell me about any guns out there that are disguised as something else? Always interested...Alasdair.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Knight%27s_Armament_Revolver_Rifle&diff=541938Talk:Knight's Armament Revolver Rifle2012-04-04T12:19:49Z<p>Masterius: /* Manufacturer */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Manufacturer ==<br />
<br />
Is this made by KAC? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:36, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Said [http://www.gods-inc.de/macavity/IsleOfShadows/weapons/Castech/sr_Wr09.html here]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:57, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, I saw that page too, just was not sure it is credible. The page title needs to be changed then. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:05, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Author points out to the September 1992 issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine as the source of information, makes it verifiable at least. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:19, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Just came across [http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=91&t=53839 this] forum thread while trying to confirm this and it has a post (3rd from the bottom) by C Reed Knight who is the founder of KAC who states "Some movie company made a copy for use on those shows. We had nothing to do with it. We were curious when we saw it on TV too". This confirms that it was made by KAC, and that the one that has cropped up in a number of tv shows and movies is a mock up. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:49, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
:But the picture on the page is the correct version, right? And what is the correct name: Revolver Rifle? Revolving Rifle? --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:06, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::[http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p22/StaceyC123/RevolverRifle-1.jpg Revolver Rifle]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:19, 4 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Knight%27s_Armament_Revolver_Rifle&diff=541881Talk:Knight's Armament Revolver Rifle2012-04-04T10:19:23Z<p>Masterius: /* Manufacturer */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Manufacturer ==<br />
<br />
Is this made by KAC? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:36, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Said [http://www.gods-inc.de/macavity/IsleOfShadows/weapons/Castech/sr_Wr09.html here]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:57, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, I saw that page too, just was not sure it is credible. The page title needs to be changed then. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:05, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Author points out to the September 1992 issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine as the source of information, makes it verifiable at least. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:19, 4 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Knight%27s_Armament_Revolver_Rifle&diff=541869Talk:Knight's Armament Revolver Rifle2012-04-04T09:57:40Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Manufacturer ==<br />
<br />
Is this made by KAC? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 02:36, 4 April 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Said [http://www.gods-inc.de/macavity/IsleOfShadows/weapons/Castech/sr_Wr09.html here]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:57, 4 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Bozitojugg3rn4ut&diff=541161User talk:Bozitojugg3rn4ut2012-04-02T18:37:14Z<p>Masterius: /* About GRAU Indices */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>==Hi==<br />
Isn't Evan Stone like a porn actor?.. --[[User:Warejaws|Warejaws]] 18:16, 14 March 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Yep, he is. (And I am not gay, just an admirer...) [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 18:20, 14 March 2011 (CDT)<br />
::Ok. I didn't think you were gay, just wondered if he was the guy I was thinking about :) --[[User:Warejaws|Warejaws]] 04:59, 15 March 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==re:recreated==<br />
The page looks good to me. You don't have to worry about it being deleted. If it was deleted before, it was because of lack of effort most likely. Good work.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 09:23, 19 March 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Redirect pages ==<br />
<br />
Sorry for my late reply, but yes, that's exactly how redirecting works. [[User:Nohomers48|Nohomers48]] 16:02, 22 March 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Moved Page==<br />
Not a problem. I've made a bunch of pages now, and I still forget about the ", The" thing.--[[User:PistolJunkie|PistolJunkie]] 11:57, 3 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Size of screenshots==<br />
Your recent screenshots are great but they are too big. Sorry but 700+ KB files are frowned upon at IMFDB. Please shrink them down or save them in a lower resolution setting. You'll see that a slightly lower resolution setting won't make much of a visual difference and save a ton of space. Thanks. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 09:56, 5 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Franken gun==<br />
Thanks for the heads up. Your attribution and notation that this is a PS job goes a long way towards smoothing over any negative reaction. Good job on the attribution. You did things the correct way. It will just motivate me to get a pic of a real gun in that configuration. But as a temporary placeholder it's fine. I historically have not liked PS chop jobs because some sharp eyed viewer will always pick up that the image is a 'repurposed photograph'. Since historically I don't want the general public to think that IMFDB 'creates' our guns from our photoshop/CS skills (other than image clean up and color correction), (IMFDB has the largest collection of ORIGINAL images of real guns on the net that is shot for us which is cool) I always press our members to resist the temptation of the Frankengun PS job. But you did things the right way from the get go. No complaints here :) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 19:18, 20 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Fallout 2 ==<br />
<br />
If you plan on redoing this page, please make sure that you have at least the gun pictures and descriptions ready. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 12:51, 19 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Czech ==<br />
Well, pretty much from Czech Republic.<br />
<br />
== Medal of Honor (2010) ==<br />
Hey, I think accidentally removed your edits because we were both editing at the same time. Can you re-check the page and see if anything's missing? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 07:08, 13 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Oh, ok ==<br />
<br />
I'm not so great for ID'ing pistols without looking through references, I was going to check after I woke up. Glad you found it. I ID'd your WW2 towed gun on the talk page for Jericho: it's a 7.5cm PaK 40, a German anti-tank gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 22:15, 5 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I think you might as well add it if you can ID it; it's perhaps pushing things a tiny bit, but it's actually probably the most accurately reproduced weapon in the game. As for Jericho, I've heard of it but never played; heard it's a middle-of-the-road title that's good in some ways and bad in others (linear level design, stupid buddy AI, etc). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:06, 6 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==GJ on Jackass 2==<br />
<br />
I would have done it as well, but didn't have the DVD to make screencaps. Nice work on it. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 13:45, 11 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Re: Just a quick question==<br />
<br />
That sounds a bit iffy to me. My main concern is how would we define a 'tactical shooter'? We already have the categories 'war', 'first-person shooter', and 'covert-ops'. Aren't those enough? [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 07:29, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Call of Juarez: The Cartel ==<br />
<br />
Well it looks like you got your wish, here is the list of "Unique Weapons that are Uncommon in Video Games or are Extremely Rare in Video Games" (Well, at least ones I haven't seen in a lot of games):<br />
<br />
1. Jericho 941<br />
2. Taurus Raging Bull<br />
3. Smith & Wesson Model 29<br />
4. Smith & Wesson Model 38<br />
5. MP-412 REX<br />
6. Walther P99<br />
7. Makarov PM<br />
8. Smith & Wesson 5906<br />
9. Ruger GP-100<br />
10. Brugger and Thomet MP-9<br />
11. Skorpion<br />
12. Colt 1878 Shotgun (Well, with the exception of Western games, this has probably never been in a Modern shooter.)<br />
13. Ithaca 37<br />
14. Colt Law Enforcement Carbine<br />
15. (Vietnam Era) M60 Machine Gun<br />
16. M72 LAW<br />
<br />
So yeah, looks like we both got our wish. Especially me, quite a few of the weapons on my wishlist made it into the game. Maybe Techland was snooping around here? Anyways looks like I got my:<br />
<br />
1. RPG-7 (Come on, who doesn't like rocket launchers)<br />
2. Skorpion<br />
3. Uzi<br />
4. Benelli M4<br />
5. MP5<br />
6. Smith & Wesson Model 29<br />
7. M72 LAW<br />
<br />
Two more days till release, Sept. 13 for PC users. - [[User:1morey]] July 17 2011, 7:30 PM (EST)<br />
<br />
== The Mechanik ==<br />
<br />
First off, good job on the page. It's best though to put unknown guns in the discussion page. Also, try to avoid overly graphic screenshots if possible. The reason why the thug getting his head shot off was removed because it wasn't necessary to identify a weapon in the shot. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 03:18, 6 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About hating ''all'' EA games ==<br />
<br />
You do know EA published Medal of Honor (2010) right? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:03, 7 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About the future plans ==<br />
<br />
Hi. You say that you will show M3 Super 90 and M16A2 in your future movies. Are you planning to make movies set in older times or haven't you yet updated your page to M4 Super 90 and M16A4? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:15, 17 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Agreed. One being former part of Soviet Union or satellite state means one is gonna have quite old equipment (unless one is Russia). We too have Makarovs and as our teaching officer waaaaay back at school once said, the only thing one can't miss with it is one's head. Shot it and it's indeed a bad pistol.<br />
:At least Czechs are already upgrading their equipment: [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/06/05/cz-skorpion-evo-iii/ lots of pistols, EVO III as SMG, S 805 as Assault Rifle, etc.] Wonder if their film directors can get a hold of this stuff... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:27, 18 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Sihoulettes==<br />
Hey man, I was curious, where'd you get all the silhouettes you used for the Desert Eagle on your page. Or did you have to make them? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 15:48, 25 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Deus Ex ==<br />
<br />
Been a little busy actually playing it to screenshot it at present, but I will get around to it at some point. There's a lot of 'incidental' weapons to get (book covers and photographs) and I'd have to set aside a really long time and a lot of hard drive space to get it done. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:06, 31 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
==sorry mate the==<br />
the terror scoped rifle is real ([[User:Cbeattie|Cbeattie]] 03:17, 9 September 2011 (CDT))<br />
<br />
== Updating images ==<br />
<br />
I've found that the only way to instantly update your images is to change the size of the image that has been changed. For instance, if you change a image from "600px" to "601px", then the image should update instantly. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 12:05, 10 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
I just need to see the thumbnail updated on the page, there's no rush to see the actual image. --[[User:Ben41|Ben41]] 02:05, 2 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Featured article==<br />
Thanks! That seemed to fix it. The extra @@@ were there on the old template. Mostly likely added by accident or when an article was taken off they weren't deleted. --[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 15:20, 13 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Medal of Honor ==<br />
<br />
Found one of those guns you wanted ID'ing back in June. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:22, 2 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== A question ==<br />
<br />
Hi, Bozito. I'm a movie buff, but I'm also an avid gamer. From your user page I can see that you are too. You created the page for [[Deus Ex: Human Revolution]], which I assume you have played by now, or at least know what the game is about. I know that the game is an action/stealth-rpg, but what I need to know is how much of it is action, and how much of it is role playing. I've been thinking of buying this game since it looks intriguing, but me and role-playing games don't go together, lol. I'm fine with RPG elements in games, like in [[Dead Island]], but I have always had a strong dislike for such games as Final Fantasy, etc. --[[User:Warejaws|Warejaws]] 17:38, 10 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Thanks, that really cleared things up for me. I just ordered the game, and can't wait to get my hands on it. --[[User:Warejaws|Warejaws]] 17:19, 11 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Call of Juarez ==<br />
<br />
Now that I think about it, the Ranger from the first one looks more like a Colt 1872 Open Top. What do you think? - [[User:1morey]] October 10, 2011 8:01 PM (EST)<br />
<br />
== PK470 ==<br />
<br />
Naw, in the next frame his hand's higher up the gun, he ends up touching the side of the scope. If he was HK slapping it I'd have thought he'd bring his hand towards the muzzle. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:29, 12 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Cabela's Dangerous Hunts 2009 ==<br />
<br />
I'm going to need some help with weapon identification. Most modern bolt-action rifles all look the same to me, and some of the other weapons, I am not completely sure. - [[User:1morey]] October 15, 2011 4:49 PM (EST)<br />
<br />
== Beretta 92A1 ==<br />
<br />
Hi. About Beretta 92A1: isn't it technically an upgraded version of 92FS based on M9A1? If so, why do you prefer 92FS? There are some features in 92A1 that you do not like so much? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:29, 21 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, that 92 pistol in CoD:MWs had rounded trigger guard and IW dared call it M9! :|<br />
:In addition to this Tx4 Storm shotgun, Beretta also made pretty slick SMG: [http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2011/03/08/new-beretta-mx4-storm-submachine-gun/ Mx4 Storm]. Imagine using it for security tasks ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 12:57, 22 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Island Thunder ==<br />
<br />
I think you should leave the notes for the expansions on the respective gun pages (ie, weapons only in Island Thunder should appear under that name); just point them to the merged Ghost Recon article. Otherwise it looks like we've forgotten the expansion packs on the gun page. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:05, 27 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, I was looking at the ones you removed like the OICW. Is that not actually in Island Thunder or something? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:26, 27 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Thanks! ==<br />
<br />
I see some tables that end with that, some that don't. I just copied and pasted from the table that was there. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:42, 27 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Arkham Asylum ==<br />
<br />
Oh, go ahead if you're playing it anyway, it was on my list of things to do but it was pretty low down. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 05:19, 2 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About OTs-14 "Groza" ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Wanted to note you about the modular nature of OTs-14 "Groza". At the bottom of this article: [http://www.zonawar.ru/rash_guns/rg_avtomat_groza_eng.html] is a great illustration of it. Thus if the weapon in game is customizable (like, say, [[Ghost Recon Online]]) then it's better not to list the fourth number. But if you want to specify the 7.62 variant, that would be OTs-14-1 (or OTs-14-1A, not sure about the 'A' letter). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:35, 2 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:You are welcome :)<br />
:If you are interested in detailed pictures of Russian guns, I would recommend you [http://www.vitalykuzmin.net/ Vitaly Kuzmin's Blog]. The man's hobby is visiting different Russian Military Expos and taking photos there. So just Google 'Kuzmin *Insert Russian weapon's name here*' and chances are, you'll find what you want :)<br />
:Also ^ Done :)<br />
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:39, 3 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
:'''P.S.''' Indeed :D<br />
<br />
::Found the pictures of 7.62 Grozas: [http://www.army.lv/ru/Fotografii/Tehnika-i-vooruzheniya/Ognestrelnoe-oruzhie/Avtomati/OTs-14-1-Groza-1-strelkovo-granatometniy-kompleks/3180 here] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 05:59, 3 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
One more thing about OTs-14. Although scope is definitely a popular choice for 03 variant, it is not mandatory. OTs-14 has mounting point on the carrying handle, thus every variant can have one: at the bottom of [http://www.army.lv/?s=2482&id=0&c=0&p=2 this page] 01 variant with scope can be seen (there is also misplaced OTs-14-1A-01 one line above) and at the bottom of [http://www.army.lv/?s=2482&id=0&c=0&p=4 this page] 03 variant without scope can be seen (they also seem to have additional attachment on the sound suppressor; sound suppressor without attachments is one line above). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:39, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Arkham Asylum ==<br />
<br />
That handgun Joker uses in the hallucination looks an awful lot like the unknown one in the sequel. Also, hit me over the head every so often to remind me to get you a picture of Joker's gun in the Play As Joker challenge maps, IIRC they're PS3 exclusive. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 13:08, 4 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Arkham City is fantastic. Think of it as like the Super Mario World to the original's Mario 3: bigger world, more things to do, more ways to do it. Plus you start with almost all the stuff you had at the end of the previous game, no Samus Aran with holes in her pockets here. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:42, 5 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== AC-130 ==<br />
<br />
If you wait long enough it flies down close to you. The AC-130 is actually tiny (it's about the size of a car) and passes very close to the mountain; if the weapons are visible, you'll see them then. But you should cover them, they're certainly seen ''firing'' in the game (eg the lines of tracers on the rebel convoy). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:37, 15 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:I haven't played the game, but in [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w58EGKYDsXU this video] it has a closeup wire frame model at the start that goes through the guns, or is this not actually from the game? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:59, 15 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== S&W 500 ==<br />
<br />
Hey man, thanks for adding the missing info on the Smith & Wesson 500 page. Also, question for you. I noticed you have a minor love affair with the Beretta 92FS... I've been considering buying my first pistol for a while now and the 92FS is at the top of my list. Out of curiosity, what do you like about it? Why would you recommend it? Happy new year. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:36, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== GRO ==<br />
<br />
Hello, I got the pics from this youtube video:<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlxW9vIl4ZY<br />
The game has a bunch of preset customised guns for players who don't want to select individual parts. Couldn't get higher res I'm afraid. --[[User:Temp89|Temp89]] 15:18, 10 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Barrett XM109 ==<br />
<br />
Hey man. Thanks for adding the [[Barrett XM109]] to the [[Barrett Firearms Manufacturing]] page! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 09:52, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:They are definitely approved. Bunni LOVED the idea (you can click on the "Manufactures" tab on the left to see more of them btw). Just make sure to add <nowiki>[[Category:Manufacturer]]</nowiki> to the bottom of the page. Also, be sure to follow the format of the other pages. But yea, that would be fantastic! The one other thing is that I'm using this as an excuse to fix up gun pages. So like when I did the Barrett page, I also redid all the gun pages for their firearms. Made sure they had specs and that they are in the table format instead of the old list, etc. You don't have to do this, but it sure would be helpful! :-) --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:37, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== RE:Barrett M107 ==<br />
<br />
No problem. Just curious, where did you find a date for the M107 on the Barrett website? I couldn't find anything about the M107 as they don't sell it any more. As for making a USMC page, I don't really think it is warranted, mainly because I don't think they have really "made" any weapons. All they have done is fit various other weapons with existing after market accessories. For example, the first M40s were just off the shelf varmint Remington 700s. Then the M40A1 just added a Macmillan synthetic stock and few other pits and pieces. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:44, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:Ah, ok. That is the thing I mentioned in the discussion, it is true that it was on the list, but it wasn't really invented in 2005. I think the reason it was listed then is that this is the point when the M107 officially stopped being developmental and was deemed fully operational. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 19 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Not sure, but I think it would have already been going by XM107, as even before a competition had taken place the project was for the selection of the M107 rifle. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:33, 20 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== NSV ==<br />
<br />
That "NSV" you just uploaded is a Kord, unless the NSV can use the 6T19 bipod mount. If it can I'll have to re-write the two weapon entries since I was under the impression it couldn't. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:38, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Also found [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwu3ivAJ68U this] while I was searching. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:58, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
[http://www.zid.ru/en/products/ V.A. Degtyarev's website] is kinda interesting, since it seems they manufacture a lot of things KBP do; just glancing, they make the GSh-23, GSh-30, the AGS-30, the missile for the Kornet system... [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 12:45, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Izhmekh==<br />
Sorry, my auto correcting software fixed it when I was looking at the page. And I updated it as my auto spell corrector told me. Just goes to show how much more famous Ishmash is in America :D [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:13, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Ukrainian Video Games ==<br />
<br />
List of Ukrainian video games on IMFDB (by developers):<br />
<br />
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4A_Games 4A Games] ([[Metro 2033|Metro series]])<br />
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_Forms Action Forms] ([[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]])<br />
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSC_Game_World GSC Game World] ([[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series]])<br />
<br />
Wonder if it is possible to start "Ukrainian Produced/Filmed" category... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:38, 24 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Metro 2033 has a Russian publisher too though: [http://ru.akella.com/Game.aspx?id=2292 Akella].<br />
<br />
:As for KBP, [http://kbptula.ru/eng/kbp/history.htm here's the history page] (originally called ''Small Arms Design Bureau of the Tula Arms Plant'', then ''TsKB-14'' and, finally, ''KBP Instrument Design Bureau'') . [[Tokarev TT-33 Pistol|TT pistol]] is the first one that was designed at the bureau, then several machine guns, then post-WW2 armament and, finally, the modern one. As can be seen, the bureau was established to boost production at the [http://www.tulatoz.ru/en/tozinfo.html ''Tula Arms Plant''] (''TOZ'').<br />
<br />
:Of weapons not already mentioned on the above history page: OTs-03 (SVU) needs [http://kbptula.ru/eng/str/strelk/oc03.htm OTs-03AS (SVU-AS)] variant - selective-fire with bipods.<br />
<br />
:--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:06, 25 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== CZ ==<br />
<br />
First off, thank you for the way that you told me about this. I REALLY appreciate you not just coming in and changing everything while I was working on it. Super cool of you. Second, thank you so much for correcting my errors! I will fix this stuff asap. I am a little hesitant to name the page "Česká zbrojovka" because no one is going to search using that name. The company is know (at least in the US) as CZ. I will definately mention that the full name of the company is Česká zbrojovka. What I might do is rename the page "CZ (Česká zbrojovka)". That way both bases are covered. Thoughts?? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:26, 25 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:You bring up a good point. For the moment, I am going to leave it as is. I posted a message in the general discussion board and I will see what other users and admins have to say. Thanks again. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 10:48, 25 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::I did. I'm in the process of talking to him and other admins about it. --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 11:02, 25 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== About MCM pistol ==<br />
MCM itself was produced by Izhmash, not by Izhmekh. Only its "children" - ''Margo'' and ''Drel'' - are from Izhmekh. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] 06:41, 31 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== AK-200 ==<br />
<br />
Have made a phoshopped 7.62 version of the AK-200 from an AK-103 and added it to the AK-12 and GRFS pages. I didn't realise until I made it that the sight block was so different so tried to bodge it to look more like the new one. Isn't perfect but is better than nothing. To be honest I'm not even sure that this is the AK-200, it was the gun that lots of polliticians and VIPs posed with and it was the gun that was reported as the AK-200, but I remember seeing videos of the people who actually designed it talking about it and the gun there was pretty different, featuring a monolithic looking top rail with rail mounted BUIS and no fixed iron sights along with a new flash hider and folding stock. Regardless, the version I made is more likely the one this is based on, and will probably never turn up in anything again now that the AK-12 has come along so doesn't really matter. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:55, 31 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:This is kind of a guess, as only images I can find of it show it disassembled (they are on the AI AW talk page). The stock is also wrong I think, as the only pictures I could find of the AWC don't have an adjustable cheek riser, but had to work with what I had.<br />
:[[File:AWC photoshop.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Arctic Warfare Covert]]<br />
:Had to mock up an AWF first to make this as there isn't one on the site either and imagine it will have turned up in stuff:<br />
:[[File:AWF photoshop.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Arctic Warfare Folding]]<br />
:--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:27, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::Sure, go for it. In particular though, I believe the AWC is slightly incorrect as I believe the profile of the short barrel is different to the AW (less tapered) but I couldn't find any good reference material. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:20, 3 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
You can get after-market stocks for the AW rifles that resemble this such as the [http://www.victorcompanyusa.com/viperskins.html Viperskins] stock. Am fairly sure that this game pre-dates this though, but this may be based on a previous design. There is also a rifle from [http://www.roedaleprecision.com/epages/semi_RH40_RCS_II.htm Roedale Precision] that looks like this. However, the Rogue spear gun and the Sum of all fears gun are both actually AWS's as they don't have a folding stock. Also, the more that I think about it the more I think the silencer on the AWC should slide down over the barrel rather than attaching onto the end of it, as shown in the gun below:<br />
[[File:Mystery AWC.jpg|thumb|500px|none|]]<br />
--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:05, 3 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
I don't really know at this point, but I suppose there should be an AWS section, as the two rifles where you can see the stock are definitely AWS's (there is a pic of an AWS on the discussion page). I'm not really sure now if the AWC should have a section, as am not sure it has actually appeared in anything at this point. For the Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield AWC, not only does it have the wrong stock for a standard AI rifle, but it also has a rounded receiver rather than squared off AI AW one. I might have to dig this game out and reinstall it to try and get a better image of a 3rd person rifle to be sure. For now though, I would probably go with assuming that all of the rifles currently listed are AWSs rather than AWCs, as can only assume that the Rainbow 6 developers would use the earlier game as reference material. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:36, 3 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== FMG-9 ==<br />
<br />
Are you sure that this is now called the FPG? As far as I know FPG is just what the airsoft version is being sold as. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:15, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
The reason I'm confused is that as far as I know the FMG-9/FPG isn't in production so I don't understand how it can have a production variant. The only version that I know of that is actually being made is the airsoft version, which is made by Magpul PTS and called the FPG. As far as I can tell, the only source that says anything about the FMG-9 actually going into production as the FPG is the description on that youtube video, which makes me think it is probably someone making a mistake. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:37, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
The video description says "Production version is called FPG" which would imply that they are talking about something that is currently being produced. It just seems odd to me that the only mention of the term FPG is on that youtube video description. I also found essentially the same thing [http://www.magpul.com/assets/files/2010Catalog/6-PTS-Propaganda.pdf here] in the brochure for Magpul PTS, the airsoft division, so imagine this is where the information for that video description came from. I seem to remember Magpul stating that they had no intention of actually going anywhere with the FMG-9 concept, it was purely a demonstration piece to show what their design team was capable of doing. I suppose that if they ever were to produce it the FPG name makes more sense, but I have seen no news of it actually being intended for production, and with the massive cult like following the Magpul seems to have (and this gun in particular) I think this would have been pretty big news. I think part of the reason it is never likely to be produced is the fact that the market for it will be tiny. In terms of civillian sales, I think it would only be available in certain states to people with a concealed carry permit due to the fact that it disguises itself as something other than a weapon, and it is also legally and short barrelled rifles meaning another hoop you would have to jump through before being able to get one. If it ever does get produced as the FPG, then fair enough, but until then it seems odd saying that the production variant is called something else when the gun isn't even being produced. On a side note, while looking into this I found that it is actually possible to convert the airsoft version into a live fire version with a bit of work. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:44, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Re: Question ==<br />
<br />
Hi. They do. Check the left side of [http://www.tsniitochmash.ru/small_arms.html their weapon page] for the full list. Some of their weapons are also manufactured by [http://www.tulatoz.ru/en/productmilitary.html TOZ] and [http://www.zid.ru/en/products/military/pecheneg.html ZID] (similarly to KBP). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:09, 16 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Was established on May 17, 1944 (as NIISPVA). In Russian, [http://www.tsniitochmash.ru/archive/a1ruz.htm on their history page]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:35, 16 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== G36C ==<br />
<br />
That carry handle replacement looks to be a [http://www.knightarmco.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=42 Knights Armament G36/SL8 Front and Rear Sight Combo]. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:26, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Yeah, it's got differently laid out trademarks on it, but that is one of KAC's logos, you can see it [http://www.knightarmco.com/shop/index.php?main_page=popup_image&pID=42 here] on the front of the front sight. Looks like the lettering is "Knights armament (logo)" and then the first serial number or the word "company". Might just be an older marking scheme and they've painted out the serial numbers or something. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:20, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== About GRAU Indices ==<br />
<br />
Hi. Wanted to note you about the GRAU Indices, such as '''6P41''' of [[PK Machine Gun#PKP Pecheneg Machine Gun|Pecheneg]]. They are assigned by GRAU MO of Russia (Main Missile-Artillery Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Russia) and are similar to NSNs (National Stock Numbers) of the West.<br />
<br />
And in this case, the army designation is '''PKP''' (Kalashnikov Infantry Machine gun).<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:37, 2 April 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Medal_of_Honor:_Warfighter&diff=540598Talk:Medal of Honor: Warfighter2012-03-31T15:23:13Z<p>Masterius: /* More details of the cover art! */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I hope it will be more exciting than the previous one... and set into the present day, or near future (as for MW2 and MW3)."<br />
<br />
<nowiki>*wonders how this one will Americanise historical events*</nowiki>[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:13, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar---[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"You're perfectly right, The Wierd It."<br />
<br />
If they set it in the near future, it'll just be another CoD clone with tacticool AKs, ACRs, G36s, and all that BS. Being based on real events (and people, in the case of Rabbit, Panther, and Dusty) is one of the things I liked about MoH2010. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Perhaps you're right once more, The Weird It/Spartan 198. Which makes the difference between it and Modern Warfare Games... Yes."<br />
<br />
== LaRue OBR ==<br />
<br />
I changed the M4 entry, but I don't have a picture of the OBR without LaRue watermaks. -- Spike785 2/25/2012 10:35PM<br />
<br />
Yeah, I went ahead and removed the M4 picture. No point in having it there if it isn't the weapon being described. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I suppose I should have done that. Should I link the 7.62 OBR pic? Or buy one and upload some sexy pics of it? [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 23:19, 25 February 2012<br />
<br />
Its not an OBR like I originaly thought, its a PredatAR. The handguard is too thin to be an OBR's, and the way the handguard angles up toward the reciever gives it away. [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 9:21, 26 February 2012<br />
<br />
:It is an OBR 5.56, the top rail is raised up higher than on a PredatAR. The 5.56 OBR is pretty different to the 7.62 in terms of the handguard being more like the PredatAR one. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MEU(SOC) Pistol? ==<br />
<br />
Is that the M1911 variant in new game? The lower part of slide doesn't seem to end like one. It could be one of custom M1911s used by Delta Force. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I'm just happy there's a 1911, period. lol Hopefully it appears in the SP campaign, though. I've no interest in MP. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:35, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
the M1911 makes me happy as well but I'd also like to see another SIG in SP. [[User:Bristow8411|Bristow8411]] 22:20, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sniper Rifle in Trailer ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/shoot-win Shoot To Win | Medal of Honor]<br />
<br />
It's one of the four: [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-cs5.php CS5] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-300.php TAC-300] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-50.php TAC-50] / [http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?clicktype=rifles M1A] (McMillan customized)<br />
<br />
And totally not M40 of any kind.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Sweet, we get to play as Ryan McMillan. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:24, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== More details of the cover art! ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/worlds-finest-illumination-tools-and-tactical-products SureFire, LLC | Medal of Honor]<br />
<br />
The [http://www.surefire.com/FA556-212-Suppressor FA556-212 Sound Suppressor], attached to the [http://www.surefire.com/mb556k-muzzle-brakeadapter.html MB556K Muzzle Brake / Suppressor Adapter];<br />
<br />
The [http://www.surefire.com/m720v.html M720V RAID WeaponLight], attached to the left rail of the weapon, with its remote dual switch attached to the top rail of the weapon.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:23, 31 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:M16_rifle_series&diff=539349Talk:M16 rifle series2012-03-29T07:52:48Z<p>Masterius: /* USE WITH S.A.S */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Screen Used Rifles==<br />
[[Image:M16A1M203ScarfaceCombo.jpg |thumb|none|600px|World IMFDB Exclusive: Screen used Faux M203 Launcher with M16A1 with Quadrant and Front ladder sight - 5.56x45mm. This is verified screen used from the film ''[[Scarface]]''. Two 30 round magazines have been taped together with black gaffer's tape to emulate the way Tony Montana loaded his weapon in the film. What is interesting is that the tape in the movie does really appear to be motion picture gaffer's tape, which would only be common on ... a movie set.]]<br />
[[Image:M4_SWAT-1-.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M4A1 with ACOG scope and Surefire M500AB weaponlight. This is one of the screen-used weapons seen in ''[[S.W.A.T. (film)|S.W.A.T.]]'' - 5.56x45mm.]]<br />
[[Image:UVARCarbine.jpg|thumb|600px|none|CAR-15 like the one used in ''[[Uncommon Valor]]'' - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:BattleLA M16A4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M16A4 (5.56x45mm) with ACOG scope, RIS foregrip, Magpul MBUS rear sight, and AN/PEQ-15 IR designator as seen in ''[[Battle: Los Angeles]]'']]<br />
[[Image:Colt Law Enforcement Model 6920 Carbine..jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Law Enforcement Carbine with ACOG scope and PentagonLight MD3R weaponlight, screen-used weapon from ''[[I Am Legend]]'' - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
<br />
==Additional Variants==<br />
[[Image:CustomNorthHollywoodAR15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Custom AR-15/M16 Hybrid gun (5.56x45mm) made to resemble the firearm used by Emil Matasareanu in the 1997 North Hollywood Bank Of America Shootout, represented in the film ''[[44_Minutes:_The_North_Hollywood_Shootout|44 Minutes:The North Hollywood Shootout.]]'']]<br />
[[Image:OlympicArmsAR15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|An Olympic Arms AR15 (note: Olympic arms did not renamed their rifles with the "K" designation until after the 1990s) with A2 Handguards and the Olympic Arms stowaway pistol grip - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M203xm177.jpg|thumb|none|600px|XM177 - 5.56x45mm with M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:model 656.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M16A1 with 20-round magazine, fitted with scope - 5.56x45mm]] <br />
[[Image:M4 m203 old.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 727 - 5.56x45mm with [[M203 grenade launcher]] - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:607-2-sm-741x267.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 607 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:Mockcommando.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt XM177E2 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:GUU-5P.jpg|thumb|none|600px|GUU-5/P - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M148.jpg|thumb|none|600px|XM177E2 - 5.56x45mm with a mounted [[XM148 grenade launcher]] - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:K3B.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Olympic Arms K3B carbine - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:101-rifle-c8fthb-carbine-6.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Canada C8A3 Carbine with EOTech red dot sight - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M16A4M203ACOG.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Artwork of an M16A4 rifle - 5.56x45mm with ACOG scope and M203 grenade launcher - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:M653M203.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 653 5.56x45mm with magazine removed and M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:Cam15a4tacticalcarbine.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Classic Army M15A4 airsoft carbine rifle - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:RRA DEA.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Rock River Arms Tactical CAR-A4 Carbine 5.56mm with EOTech sight]]<br />
[[File:Model 633 SMG DOE.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt 9mm SMG DOE (Model 633), shortened variant of the Model 635 produced for the Department Of Energy - 9x19mm]]<br />
<br />
==Airsoft Replicas==<br />
[[Image:CAXM177.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A Classic Army XM177 airsoft replica rifle - 5.56x45mm (of the type used by SF troops in some scenes of the movie ''[[Green Zone]]'').]]<br />
[[Image:XM177_shorty.jpg|thumb|none|600px|CAR-15 SMG AIRSOFT RIFLE - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:Icsm4ris2006.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M4A1 AIRSOFT RIFLE with a RIS foregrip and AN/PEQ-2 IR designator - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:Colt AR15 Match Target Competition HBAR II 6731.jpg|thumb|600px|none|Colt AR15 Match Target HBAR II (Model MT6731) - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
This is the marushin cap gun?--[[User:Kin93|Kin93]] 07:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
::Yes, you are right, it is, so this is one of the FIRST guns I need to photograph (a real one) and replace this Airsoft abomination. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
Actually thats a ICS airsoft M4 with the grip and laser box....<br />
<br />
An airsoft gun and a cap gun aren't the same thing. LOL [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:43, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Interesting ==<br />
...I seriously doubt anyone will ever see an underslung version of the M203 used in a film, all by itself, ...<br />
<br />
but there have been stand alone M203 launchers (modified with a pistol grip and stock like the M79LF 37mm launchers) as well as the M203 being attached to guns other than the M16 (take Rambo III for example where they attached it to an AK). Having a section on the M16 w M203 on the M16 page makes sense since that is where people will look if they're curious about that particular combo appearing in a movie. But I like having a separate page for the M203 to address more detailed history of the launcher plus any applications where the launcher is used with other weapons. Just a thought...<br />
::We do need a page where M203s are used as stand alone launchers, rare, but it has happened. But we should shift all M203s underslung to M16s to the M16 Page and have a note directing users to that page when looking for that combination on the M203 page. Just IMHO.... [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Makes sense, that configuration. Also, there was a standalone M203 on Bones, and there might be others (sometime WAY in the future, when a director wants to use a "modern" version of an M79, like how James Cameron used the fictional roto-craft in place of the Huey).<br />
<br />
== Do well really need to have an "A2" and "A3" category?==<br />
<br />
[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] has already explained that just about all of the "M16A2s" used in movies are actually A2 uppers on A1 lowers, often with A1 flash hiders. By this definition, none of them are true "M16A2s", and might actually be considered M16A3s roughly. But since they're usually seen impersonating M16A2s, I say designate by receiver style only (both the A2 and A3 have what is usually called the "A2 receiver").<br />
<br />
In other words, I think we should ditch the M16A3 category completely. It makes no sense to distinguish between A2s and A3s when basically all of the "Hollywood" A2s and A3s are the same type of gun. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 20:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I never got anyone's feedback on this, but...I decided to go ahead and ditch the M16A3 entry, for the reasons I explained above. It doesn't make sense to try and distinguish between "A2s" and "A3s" in movies when MoviePropMaster has explained that they're all basically the same thing - A2-style uppers on fully automatic A1 lowers. By that definition, none of them are true "M16A2s", but since they're obviously supposed to portray such rifles in movies, it makes more sense to call them A2s. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I agree, because the M16A3 was made for Navy SEALs and SeeBees, no civilian hands hae touched them. -Winchester (1-26-09)<br />
I believe the 1995 remake of Village of the Damned portrayed the National Guard using burst fire. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 03:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
(the above was in reply to a comment that the author deleted as i posted.) --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 03:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Also I think Colt sold A3s to foreign entities, National police of allied countries, Elite units, etc. Any country with which we are friendly and Colt has sold weapons in the past. I've heard that A3s were sold as samples to France, U.K. and Germany (but that was a casual comment that I heard years ago). There 'could' be A3s in the armories of foreign movie productions. That is a completely grey area with which I have no one to verify anything. :( [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 05:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:This is strange. I posted a comment here a couple hours ago, asking how many movies are there were burst fire is portrayed? I know Black Hawk Down has one instant. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
::I've seen some films that had three round burst fire. I will try to get the titles and list them [[Special:Contributions/205.172.16.102|205.172.16.102]] 01:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is a significant difference between a true A2 and A3 M16. Externally, they look identical, however the A3 is full auto and the A2 is 3 shot burst. Simply put: A1 and A3 are full auto, A2 and A4 are 3 shot burst. The external differences are what make it a little easier to identify. We all know what an A1, A2, and A4 M16 look like, but the A3 is just an A2 that is full auto. Hope this helps; Its my first time posting. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:14, 29 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The caption to the M16A1 w/ M16A2 handguards... ==<br />
I was in the National Guard in the early '90's and that's exactly what we had. I was also issued an M16A1 with A2 handguards in basic training. It turns out that it's simpler and--from what I heard--cheaper to replace the 'A1 guards with 'A2 guards because the 'A2's are less complex and you only need to stock one type instead of 'lefts' and 'rights'. Also, the 'A1'a in the national guard were freshly rebuilt, tested, and had the serial numbers laser etched into the bolt carriers. They were issued with all 'A2 furniture.<br />
<br />
:Yeah, I've seen plenty of A1s with A2 hand guards elsewhere. In fact, if you ever watch footage of the current offensive into Gaza, you can see both IDF personnel and Hamas militants using them. The Israelis received a lot of M16A1s and have updated many of them with the M16A2 hand guards. Many of these rifles were passed into Israeli's "allies" in Fatah, and then Hamas stole plenty of them during their war with Fatah (some were also probably stolen from the IDF themselves). -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 22:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
just for the record here is an M16A1 with A2 handguards in service <br />
[[Image:RP Marines assault line DM-SD-06-10463.JPEG|thumb|none|600px|RP Marines armed with M16A1s with A2 handguards.]] <br />
--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 22:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Mark 12 Special Purpose Rifle ==<br />
<br />
Does anyone have an image of one?<br />
-[[User:AdAstra2009]]<br />
<br />
:I put one on the ''[[Live Free or Die Hard]]'' page that I took from another site. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks I pasted it from that page but we should probably look into getting a noncopyrighted one.<br />
-[[User:AdAstra2009]]<br />
<br />
::Well, you can ask MoviePropMaster2008 if he has a Mark 12 upper in his company's inventory. I imagine he also knows armorers at Cinema Weaponry (the guys who supplied the weapons for ''[[Live Free or Die Hard]]''), so he might even be able to get us one of the same guns used in that movie. But he's very busy of course and has LOTS of other image requests to tend to, so it might be a while before he gets around to it. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
== Rate of Fire on the M16A1 ==<br />
Does anyone know the rate of fire on the M16A1?[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 22:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I assume it's about 800 rounds a minute [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 08:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:That would be correct, it's around 750 to 800 RPM. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== What is this? ==<br />
It's not really from a movie, but a music video, and I havn't been able to figure out what this AR is yet, there are two others in the video, one's an M16A1, the other an A2, but I just can't figure this one out.<br />
<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle1.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle2.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle3.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle4.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle5.JPG<br />
<br />
Looks like an M733, what is this from? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 08:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
:The gun in the first 'cap looks different from the CAR-15s in the other pictures. Maybe it's a fake XM177?-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 12:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
::It's from the music video for Hero Of War by Rise Against, the main soldier uses it, his two buddies use an M16A1 and M16A2, I'm almost 100% sure there are only three rifles in the video. Yeah, I'm thinking M733 too... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]]<br />
<br />
==XM607 Commando Carbine==<br />
I do remember the weapon from ''[[Pink Cadillac]]'' an XM607, or an AR-15 modified to imitate one. The weapon may not have been officially adopted but kits were released to the public though:<br />
<br />
* [http://totalsilenceinc.com/XM607_pages/questions.html 1]<br />
* [http://www.retroblackrifle.com/ModGde/CrbGde/607.html 2]<br />
* [http://www.fototime.com/A2FFCE89093C8E7/standard.jpg 3]<br />
<br />
[[User:Cutaway|Cutaway]] 18:54PM, 3/7/2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I changed the entry after I watched the trailer for the movie. The trailer is on YouTube, and the gun in question is visible at the 00:27-00:28 mark:<br />
<br />
:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LddykTA8nVg<br />
<br />
:That is definitely an older-model LaFrance Specialties M16K. It doesn't have the triangular front sight post of the XM607. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 18:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==The Photoshopped M16 images==<br />
<br />
Can people '''please''' stop posting the images of M16 variants that were edited using MPM's photos? There's a reason I've removed them before. We don't need to have every variant on the page, and many of them are inaccurate, anyway. The only one we allow is the XM16E1, because we don't have a good photo of one of those yet, and even that may get replaced. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
*The Colt 607 image I posted wasn't one of MPM's [unless someone stole it and re-hosted it], I got it from google. Only put it here because the page for the The World Is Not Enough videogame didn't have a 607 image. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 05:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why do we have Colt Model 727 by itself==<br />
When the Model 727 is just the commercial Colt name for the M4 carbine? it doesn't make sense to have the exact GUN made by Colt with it's commercial name (for law enforcement sales or international sales) with a separate category, when it should just be merged in with the M4/M4A1 category. The M16 page is getting out of control. MPM2008<br />
<br />
:I agree that the Model 727 should be merged with the M4 category, but it's not exactly a commercial name for an M4. The Model 777 is the commercial name for the very first M4 (the one that didn't have the detachable carry handle). The 727 and 777 are identical, but the 727 is safe-semi-auto and the 777 is safe-semi-burst. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
:::Good point. But in the overall view, I think all that info (a) should be in the M4 category, (b) should be a footnote, NOT a separate category and (c) people are endlessly creating separate categories for weapons that are essentially the same guns as other categories. Experienced IMFDB users/Mods already know that most of the M16 variants seen in films are build ups of other guns. We usually just get the accessories and barreled uppers and put them on our full auto or semi auto lowers. Why spend thousands to get new guns when we're sitting on dozens and dozens of other M16s? Also, in VideoGames and Anime, again, they don't have to specify the new or commercial model unless it's specifically stated or named explicitly. Even then it can be a footnote in the original category. <br />
<br />
==Adding images==<br />
<br />
I'm getting a little annoyed with people adding images we don't need on the page, including many that are crap and which aren't necessary. Not to mention that half of them aren't even using the "<nowiki>br clear=all</nowiki>" command to ensure that the images won't drift into the next gun entry. So, I'm putting a stop to this now. No more without talking about it here first. Next person who doesn't respect my wishes gets a 1-week time out. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 17:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:They're still doing it. I have removed the custom A1 upper mounted on an SP1 lower with A2 handguards from this page several times. It is not a common real like frankengun (but it has happened). I originally built this and photographed it for the HEAT page until better screenshots proved that Wes Studi's AR15 was an A1 style lower, not an SP1. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I couldn't agree more, for some reason, these users seem to think that every single picture of a gun needs to be on it's page. It especially frustrates me when they're sticking all customized guns that only appear in one movie onto a page, they may look cool, but they're not even standard configurations! All they end up doing is turning the gun page into a cluttered, sloppy mess of pictures, I mean just look at the [[Remington 870]] and [[Mossberg 500]] pages.--[[User:Alienqueen11|Alienqueen11]] 22:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Would it be alright if I added the following image to the [[M16 rifle series#M4/M4A1 with M203 Grenade Launcher|M4/M4A1 with M203 Grenade Launcher]] section?<br />
<br />
[[Image:Sopmod m4 m203 06.jpg|thumb|none|350px|M4A1 5.56x45mm with M68 Aimpoint red dot scope, flip-up rear sight, and M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
<br />
Figured that since the other sections on the page have pics of the 'basic' and 'tricked-out' versions, why not this one? [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 21:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Does anyone have any pictures of a heavily modified M4 style platform? ex- The Unit, BlackHawk Down, Tears of the Sun? [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 17:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
So why not update this page to include current issue M16A4 rifles?<br />
(unless you don't know what they are....)<br />
<br />
==A Warm Thank-You==<br />
For years I have been trying to find out what the guns were Peter & Roger used in Dawn of the Dead. This site solved what the problem so many other "gun experts" on IMDb could not. Again, thank you.<br />
:Thats what IMFDB is for =) --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 18:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Let's See If You Can Figure This Out==<br />
I couldn't find a real picture so I put this together. Its an M4A1 with the old style stock, and a straight (no cuts) 16" barrel; or its a Sporter (or one of those older three number ones like that) with a removable carry handle; take your pick. I was just wondering what it actually is...<br />
<br />
P.S. Every detail is intentional and exactly how its supposed to be even though its not a real picture, just so everyone knows that. ;)<br />
[[Image:M4A1COD4.jpg]]<br />
<br />
:It would be a hybrid commercial AR variant. It has an M16A1 style lower receiver, so it is NOT a Sporter I or II. Basically, it's an M4 Carbine with a flat top and detachable carry handle, with an old style buttstock and a civilian HBAR Carbine barrel outfitted with RIS forearms. Various manufacturers made similar guns to this design, like Bushmaster and a few others. Also many builders of AR15s made similar guns from parts kits from M&A, Patriot Arms, (the now defunct Nesard), Sun Valley, and others. With the advent of custom builds from aftermarket parts from dozens of manufacturers, the AR15 has become the ultimate "mutt". I can tell you this is NOT an issued military variant, so it would NOT have an "M" designation unless it was built from an M4 to begin with. Also nearly everyone uses the step down M4 style barrels for carbines, unless it's the ultra light. The HBAR Carbine style barrels are becoming rarer by the day since their heyday was the 1990s. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Thanks a lot, very informative answer. This is the "M4 Carbine" in Call Of Duty 4, and I've been trying to figure out exactly what it really is for a while. I didnt say where it was from because I figured the answer I'd get would be something like "its a videogame, so its probably not a real model", but I knew that ;) I like the look and have been trying to make it as an airsoft project, this helps a lot... too bad airsoft HBAR barrels are very hard to come by. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::How did you make that? At first I thought it was Pimp My Gun, but PMG doesn't have an M16A1 pistol grip yet. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::No, you thought right my friend, it is Pimp My Gun, I just used MS Paint to remove the little finger nub and made the HBAR barrel by copying and pasting the largest part of the barrel over the rest of it. That's all the "photoshopping" that I did. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:45, 13 <br />
February 2010 (UTC)<br />
::If it's from CoD4, then blame lack of details on modelers that made that gun model. They simply saved some poligons for improved performance of the game. Same thing with lack of gas-block when front sight is removed. It supposed to be M4A1 and i'm 100% sure they had pictures of military issued M4A1's as a reference.<br />
:::I'm sure they wanted it to be an M4A1, but I've seen a lot of movies where HK94s were converted to be MP5s, or 92FSs were converted to be 93Rs and last I checked on this site we identify guns on what they are, not what they're supposed to be... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== M16A1 series' portray ==<br />
<br />
In the present, does anyone think that like the Ak47 and its variants, the M16A1 series is sometimes stereotypically portrayed as a bad guy's gun?<br />
I've seen the IRA, FARC guerillas, Mexican drug lords and some gangbangers use them.<br />
Overall is this true?<br />
:In the real world, the USSR dumped millions of AKs into the hands of satellite states and insurgents around the world. In the Vietnam and immediate post Vietnam years the U.S. dumped millions of M16A1s to our allies. With the fall of Vietnam, all of the South Vietnamese M16A1s ended up in the hands of communist guerillas (as well as the AK). The AK and the M16 were the most prolifically distributed weapons of the last 50 years. There is no conspiracy to make them 'look bad'. They're in the hands of everyone so it is invevitable.<br />
:Even Iran uses a variant of the M16A1, a copy of the Norinco CQ called the ''S-5.56'', as their standard rifle. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== AR Series firing 5.7 Ammo??? ==<br />
<br />
I was in a gun shop in Michigan today and saw a weapon with an AR-15 type body but with the mag of a P-90 running along the rail. I asked the guy at the shop and he did confirm the weapon did fire the 5.7 round. Anyone have any idea who makes the weapon and what it may be called? Incidentally the store was The Firing Line in Westland Michigan. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 03:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
::They sell those uppers here in California all the time. My local gun store has 5.7mm firing AR15 uppers that take the P90 magazine. But I never bothered to check who made it, that's what GOOGLE is for. I just never had an interest [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I have seen examples of this conversion as well. It is actually a specially-made upper receiver that can be mounted onto pretty much any AR-15 style lower receiver. The magazine mounts along the top of the weapon as with the P90, and the original magazine well in the lower receiver becomes the ejection port with the spent brass falling down through there instead of being spit out to the side. As for the manufacturer, I can't quite recall who makes it, but it is definitely quite an interesting piece of hardware. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 07:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As long as my memory goes, is called the AR-57 and is manufactured by 57Center, or something like that --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I remember when Impact Guns got those in. You can buy them here: http://www.impactguns.com/store/AR-57%20UR.html<br />
<br />
::The manufacturer's web site, as Yocapo32 pointed out, is 57 Center. Their web site is here: http://www.57center.com/<br />
<br />
::What's interesting is that the AR magazine well is where the brass gets ejected. The only problem I can see with having a P90 magazine mounted on top is that it leaves limited rail space on top for mounting accessories. You could have a scope or iron sights, and not much else. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 15:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the info guys, again, I know this was not germane to the topic, it was just a little odd to see something like that as I had never heard of it before. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 16:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Stolen M4A1s==<br />
<br />
In real life is there ever any incidents where police have seized M4A1 carbines from criminials or terrorists during raids?<br />
<br />
:Do you mean mil-spec M4s, as opposed to semi-auto AR-15 carbines that are patterned after the M4? I would doubt it. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 21:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Never, or else it has never been reported anywhere, ever. And I am talking about real select fire 14.5" barreled M4/M4A1 carbines. However, California has had a rash of MP5s and MP5Ks stolen out of police cars, which were left unlocked when the cops were in a strip club. Seriously. they have not shown up since....[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Suitable combat weapon==<br />
<br />
Which weapon is considered better for infantry? An M16A1/M203 combo or an OICW?<br />
:M16A1/M203. The XM29 weighs damn near 20 lbs., compared to 8 or 9 lbs. for the M16 when fitted with a 203. Fire control system or not, the last thing I'd want to be stuck with on a 60 mile march is an F-ing 20 lbs. rifle. And sign your posts by typing four '''~''' after them. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 23:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The M16/M203 combo is definitely superior; it has been proven in real-world combat situations over the last 30-plus years, whereas the only live-fire situation the XM29 has seen at the most is at the Aberdeen testing ranges. The closest replacement the M16/M203 will likely see anytime soon is an [[FN SCAR]]/[[Heckler & Koch M320|M320]], and even then the SCAR is only in limited use with the 75th Ranger Regiment at present. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 05:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The real question is whether or not the XM8 Carbine is better than the M4A1/derivatives (H&K 416, REC7, etc). And we probably won't ever know. <br />
<br />
Also, the OICW was more of a man-portable version of a Doom gun than anything that you would actually bother carrying on duty. 20mm airburst auto-loader, saboted sub-5.56mm rounds? What could you use that for other than trying to clear a drug cartel's fortified mansion by yourself?<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]<br />
<br />
:One of the many things that led to the death of the XM29 was its sheer size. The Army wanted it scaled down to the size of an M4 [http://www.ghostrecon.net/images_arms/xm29_1.jpg] and 14 lbs max (which an M4 with all its mods gets pretty close to), but with today's technology, it just wasn't possible. Maybe in 20 years or so it will be, but the XM29 is presently dead for the foreseeable future. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Installation of a front Flip up/down Iron sights. ==<br />
<br />
I was watching The Losers, and while I agree that those 4 characters all had M4A1s, they seemed to switch between fixed front sight and flip up/down iron sights. I was wondering how hard it would be to take an M4A1, remove the front factory sight and replace it with a flip up/down sight. I know it's pretty easy for the rear sight, but I wasn't sure about the front sight. (OK, I also want to ask this question because I, like many people, have played Modern Warfare 2 and seen the M4 with a flip up/down front sight.) --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
:Not really that difficult. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
:I believe the process would involve removing the muzzle brake and the existing front sight/gas block assembly and replacing it with a gas block that has either a rail to mount your choice of front sight, or a folding front sight, then reinstalling the muzzle brake. You can find instructional videos for this process at various gunsmithing websites. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 14:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Forward Assist ==<br />
Does anyone know when reloading if it is a good idea to hit the forward assist after hitting the bolt release or its ok just to start firing after hitting the bolt release?<br />
<br />
:The idea behind hitting the forward assist after reloading is to ensure the bolt is fully seated and that the weapon is ready to fire. It's generally not really nessicary at the range, but when in a combat situation where you might have dirt or whatnot fouling the chamber, it's a good idea to do that to ensure that the weapon will fire when you need it to.[[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 23:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The M16 series are the ONLY assault rifles (except the [http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:g41-series&catid=8:the-automatic-rifles&Itemid=5/ HK G41], which is made to be like the M16 and is no longer produced) in the world to have a forward assist. Why don't other assault rifles have a forward assist? (ie. the AK-74, G36 etc.) Because other assault rifles are more reliable and don't need it. :)<br />
::Uh more associated with the design of the Bolt than being more reliable. The AK series have a bolt handle attached DIRECTLY to the bolt carrier as do many other designs. If there is debris or fouling in the chamber which keeps a round from seating properly you can just jam the handle forward (I've done this in the field when my AK / Garand / Galil / M 14 / etc jammed) I once had a tiny piece of bark (I was firing under trees) which fell from above and fell into the ejection port and made the round 'stick' really badly in the chamber so that it would not seat properly. The M16 design has no way other than the forward assist to nudge the bolt & carrier forward enough to fire and kick that crap free of the action. But I wouldn't bash the M16 as an "unreliable" rifle. I'd sure take it into battle right now. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
:::Alright, I understand. thanks for the extra info. I'm not saying the M16/M4 is a complete piece of crap, but it's definitely not the BEST ASSAULT RIFLE IN THE WORLD! like we Americans like to state all the time (*rolls eyes*). You and me both know the M16/M4 is no where as reliable as the G36 or the AK series. But at least it's better than the L85 series, now that's a piece crap rifle. :D *Edit: Well at least the L85A1, the L85A2 is OK. kinda like the M16/M16A1s sucks but the M16A2/A4s are good.<br />
<br />
::::I have to completely disagree with what you say, i don't wish to come off as passive aggresive but you sound like a mall ninja that learned their weapons knowledge from seeing them perform in videogames or hearing public opinions on weapons from the news or other sources. The M16 family of rifles are both fine and fairly reliable weapons, while much of that view has been skewed by the fact they were portrayed as unreliable during conflicts such as Vietnam, is incorrect to a degree. The M16 is a reliable and capable weapon when cleaned and properly maintained, it simply lacks the ability to stay so when not properly serviced, as some other rifles such as the AKM can function fine without cleaning, the M16 can not. As for your comment on the L85 series, yes they were somewhat poor and unreliable weapons at first, coupled with poor grips and clumsy to handle for certain users, however the newer models have made large improvements and are very capable firearms. As i feel it needs to be said (or typed) a common mistake people make is assuming that militaries have access and funding to field their troops with the best weapons available, which is not always the case as most countries don't have the money to field an Army with rifles that can cost up to $5000-10000 per unit. Which is where the workhorses like M16's come in, you go for the "good" rifle not the "great" one. Also, although off-topic it somewhat pertains to the M16, most mall ninja's assume the AK-family is better because it is more reliable and fires a heavier cartridge, I've always asked "would you want a round that's going to pierce right through an enemy and leave an easy to treat wound, or have a round that hits an enemy and fragments inside them causing an ungodly bloody mess?" Hopefully esteemed imfdb members such as MPM2008 will agree with and share my viewpoint concerning this subject, as well as not condemn me for my long comment. [[User:Doc345|Doc345]] 13:24, 06 March 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::The issues of jamming during the Vietnam War had more to do with ammunition and the lack of a chrome-lined chamber and barrel than the rifle's so-called "dirty" gas system. In 1964 the Army switched from stick powder to ball powder, which increased the rate of fire to over 1,000 RPM and left a lot of dirty residue in the weapon. This was only exacerbated by the lack of cleaning kits and training on how to maintain the weapon. They fixed the issue by fitting the rifle with a buffer system (which slowed the ROF down) and chrome-plated chamber. Training programs in weapon maintenance were instituted and an instruction book on how to maintain the rifle was circulated among troops. After further modifications resulted in the M16A1, many of the reliability issues disappeared (although even today, the weapon has yet to shed its bad reputation). The M16A2, A3, A4, and M4 carbine of today are an entirely different breed of warrior than the prototypes that were issued back in the 60s. While it may admittedly be a bit finicky, the M16 today is a good weapon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:29, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Yeah but it's still a very fussy weapon, it's not very durable, and it has much more malfunctions/jams then say the H&K G36, but none the less it's still a excellent weapons platform, mostly. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I was always taught that the forward assist, while useful in combat, in situations where dirt or grime can jam a weapon, overall, if you DO need to use it, its a good indication of a malfunction and should be addressed, especially if its at a range. Theres a video somewhere on youtube, of a guy shooting some sort of AR, and repeatedly hits the forward assist, without clearing or checking the bore, until the entire gun explodes, probably from a round hitting one stuck in the bore. -MissySummers- 18:47, 8 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== The comment about the SPR Mk 12 shooting full auto... ==<br />
<br />
The design--at least the original ones--used a match grade trigger group that actually fired full auto.<br />
<br />
If my Web Fu is correct, NSN 1005-01-562-0901 from Knight's Armament. <br />
<br />
The original, intended purpose was to allow the uppers to be swapped out for a short barreled model initially so a marksman could use a short range weapon on the way in and out and the more accurate upper at the objective.<br />
<br />
Sources: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=003aa7475e95c9b56d5814227cc5d4ec&tab=core&_cview=0<br />
<br />
::https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fbd46923c9e6d18cd916b8a6e7d3cfdf&tab=core&_cview=0 <br />
<br />
States the Special Purpose Receiver (Early designs) specifies:<br />
<br />
"(C) OTHER PERFORMANCE GOALS: (1) Increased reliability, durability, corrosion resistance, ease of cleaning, lubricity/reduced friction; fully functional for a minimum of 15,000 rounds (Threshold)/30,000 rounds (Objective), performing up to the standards and firing rates to be published in the Solicitation, functional reliability exceeding that of the standard M4A1 carbine at high and low temperature extremes as well as other hostile (sand/dust/dirt/mud/surf) environmental conditions (2) Improved safety- delay cook-off, fail-safe features, fires/functions safely and without delay of draining in the Over-The-Beach (surf zone, weapon flooded with water) environment. (3) User Acceptance: operational suitability, increased live-fire hit scores, decreased live-fire engagement times, speed/accuracy of engagement, '''controllability in semi-automatic and full automatic fire''', improved handling qualities, light weight, snag free in movement through vegetation and battlefield obstacles." (Accent added)"<br />
<br />
== Standard Issue M4 vs. M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
Does the Army issue regular infantry (i.e. 4th Inf. Div.) the three-round burst M4 or the M4A1? I always thought it was the M4A1 (and please forgive me if I got to the party late), but from what I've read, it seems like they issue the regulars the Model 920, leaving the 921 for Special Forces and the like. -<br />
<br />
i think it all depends on the on-base armory. for example some armory's might still have some M4s. but i think the regular infantry does use the M4A1. however. Special forces dont use the M4A1 or the M4. they use the hK416/417. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 17:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:- Though I don't know for certain, I wouldn't imply Spec-Ops units use ''only'' the new HK rifles - As you've said, it all depends on what's around, and to a degree what the soldiers prefer (in the case of Special units). Though the aforementioned HK rifles are in inventory, that doesn't automatically cancel the M4s out - some personnel might still use 'em. Plus there are other weapons around, namely the FN SCAR series. Though I would agree use of the M4 with Special Forces probably isn't as common these days.<br> As for a regular-issue weapon, I agree that the M4 and M4A1 are both in use nowadays, with the A1 perhaps being more prominent. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 19:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Actually, Stan, my understanding is that it's the opposite. The M4 is the most common version, not the M4A1. U.S. military doctrine still discourages full-auto for infantry rifles, so it seems unlikely to me that the M4A1 is going to be more common. As for the SCAR, SOCOM just decided this past June that they weren't going to order any more SCAR-Ls for the foreseeable future, which means that even amongst most SF units, the M4 will remain their standard weapon. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:- Well, I wasn't too sure, but I guess that does make sense to stick with the burst-fire M4. Good point. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 01:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The only SF unit that uses the M4 (920) that I can think of is the Asymmetric Warfare Group, but that's only 'cause they had to hand in their HK416s. According to a book I've got, that decision went over like a lead balloon with the AWG. -<br />
<br />
thank god. im not a huge fan of the SCAR-L i find it pointless. if you want to go with a new alternative to the M4/M16. why the hell would you take an unfamiliar weapon. alas the hK416. same rate of fire. same Picatanny rail, same attachments, same stock, same barrel, same trigger group, and extremely similiar internals. and Stan, i do agree. if i made it sounds like all SF use the hK416, i didnt mean to. i/we really DONT no what they all use. they pick their own. they could carry an AK-47 or a CAR-15 if they wanted to. we cant make generalizations about units that get custom made equipment. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 20:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
- No prob, dude - I'm just glad you got what I was gettin' at. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 20:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
i would be shocked if they couldnt pick their weapons. their the best soldiers on the planet. it just doesnt make sense not to be able to. it would be like giving a star baseball player a 10 dollar glove. itll do but why wouldnt they get the best thats out there. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 01:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Reg army units use the burst M4, not the full auto A1. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
A couple of months ago when I was at a military base there were Marines conducting a weapons demo with the M4 carbine. It was the 3-round burst rifle, but a question came up about the M4A1. One Marine said that they got rid of all M4A1s and only have M4s. I personally don't see the need for a full-auto rifle and 3-round burst is fine because it forces the user to slow down and most of the time the user uses semi-only, combat or not, but that is my opinion. The M4A1 is still probabley used by the US Military, but I'm not sure, I haven't seen one in a long time.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:29, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Accurized Rifle ==<br />
<br />
After seeing several pages of real firearms appearing in only one film or game, I was wondering if I should expand this page with a new section for the [http://www.colt.com/law/car.asp Colt Accurized Rifle], which to my knowledge has only ever appeared in [[S.W.A.T. 4]]. Before I do that, I need to confirm two things: <br />
<br />
*Is the Colt Accurized Rifle indeed another variant on the M16 line of rifles, or a separate take on the AR-15 design altogether? I suppose there's a reason why we don't include the [[Z-M LR 300]] in the M16 page because it's the latter--I need to know if the Colt Accurized Rifle falls in that category.<br />
*Including it on this page would make it the first Designated Marksman Rifle variant here. So far I only see assault rifles or carbines here. Would including a DMR in this page be a problem or not? <br />
<br />
If there are no real problems, I'll make a new section for it, but I have no idea where I'll get a non-copyright infringment image of one. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 01:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:It'd be the '''second''' DMR on the page. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the info, but can someone confirm that the Colt Accurized Rifle is indeed descended from the M16 line of assault rifles and not a separate take on the AR-15 design like the aforementioned LR-300 is? I still have no idea where I can get a photo of this DMR that respects copyright. All I have are game screenshots. Some help here, please? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 22:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Removeable Carry Handle for Colt 9mm SMG? ==<br />
<br />
Does such a Gun exist?<br />
<br />
:Not as a production gun (Colt's website makes no mention of one, anyway), but the modular nature of the AR system makes such a configuration entirely possible. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why do we have a Colt AR-15 SP1 category that is separate from the M16/SP1 category?==<br />
The guns look the same, sure the SP1 had a design change in 1978 (three prong flash hider was changed to birdcage, rear sling swivel was changed to A1 style and the color went from greenish grey to straight grey) but unless we see the stamp on the side that says "Property of U.S. Government" we can't tell if it's a real M16 (which WERE sold via Title II dealers to armories) and a Colt AR15 SP1 which was converted to full auto (which was done A LOT prior to 1986). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 19:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== About M4 Commando and M16A4 Full Auto ==<br />
<br />
Full Auto M16A4 (Model 905) is [http://www.colt.com/mil/M16_2.asp Model 901]<br />
<br />
[http://www.colt.com/mil/M4Com_2.asp Model 933] ''is'' M4 Commando (Full Auto)<br />
<br />
[http://www.colt.com/mil/home.asp Manufacturer's site] says it all.<br />
<br />
== Colt Model 653 barrel length ==<br />
<br />
Am trying to pin down what a gun is for a page I'm working on. It has a forward assist but no deflector, A1 rear sight, M4 length tubular handguard, 16" barrel with birdcage flash hider and a solid stock. Basically it matches the gun in the picture for the Model 653 on the main page, apart from having a solid stock but that is easily changeable. However, every source I can find about the 653 says that it has a 14" barrel. Was the gun made in different barrel lengths but kept the same designation, and if not, anyone know what the gun is that is pictured as a 653? Also, while I'm on the topic of obscure colt carbines, does anyone know of a model that will match a 725 (original C8 without the flat-top) but has an A2 rear sight? Thanks, --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:16, 16 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Can anyone figure out what this is? ==<br />
<br />
I found this hidden in my computer, I think it's a Colt Canada C7A1 as a base, I can tell it's C7 because of the Canadian leaf on the the lower receiver, it would be an A1 because of the removable carrying-handle. What the heck is that hand-guard? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:02, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[Image:Colt Canada C7A1 SPW.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Canada C7A1 SPW?]]<br />
<br />
:Colt Model 750/Diemaco C7 Light Support Weapon - A modified C7 with an enlarged gas tube (hence the square handguard) and a heavy barrel for sustained fire in the squad automatic weapon role. The C7 LSW is not used by the Canadian Forces but has seen service with the Dutch and Danish militaries. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 01:34, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ha! I thought so, thanks. :) Should I remove this section or keep it. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:53, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That's not Colt LSW, that's [http://www.colt.com/mil/CAR.asp Colt Automatic Rifle]. Follow the link and you will see that the image is the larger version of the official one. Meanwhile, [http://www.coltcanada.com/lsw-page.htm Colt LSW] has optional folding carry handle. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:09, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Thanks guys. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 12:02, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Just to clarify, the Colt automatic rifle, LSW and LMG are all the same weapon. The original version that looks like the one above was the Colt Model 750, which featured a fixed A2 carry handle and barrel mounted bi-pod, and the newer version above is the current production Model 950, with the relocated bi-pod and A4 rear sights. As you said, the folding carry handle is removeable, and the picture on the Colt website is just one without it fitted (note the longer centre vent on the top of the handguard is the mounting point for the handle). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 02:48, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::The original version was based on M16A1:<br />
<br />
::[[File:M16A1 CAR.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
<br />
::The one you described was based on M16A2:<br />
<br />
::[[File:M16A2 CAR.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
<br />
Guys, remember back in the 1980s when Colt was trying to vie for the SAW role? Sure the FN Minimi was never knocked off its perch, but Colt came out with a Colt light Machine gun that looked a lot like this. They were selling the barreled uppers on the market for a while in the early 1990s (I know a few friends who have them, but I never got one). This looks like that reincarnated!!! LOL![[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:24, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, that's all written on [http://world.guns.ru/machine/usa/m16-lsw-lmg-e.html Modern Firearms] :P<br />
<br />
::Ah yes, you only read about it monkeyboy ;) I was handling and firing that sucker! LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:11, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, and I've found articles of why AR is more advantageous than SAW to US Marine Corps:<br />
<br />
:[http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/m249-employment-concepts M249 Employment Concepts]<br />
:[http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/m249-light-machinegun-automatic-rifle-role The M249 Light Machinegun In The Automatic Rifle Role]<br />
<br />
:Interesting reading, methinks :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 30 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yeah it was. :) You know, I kinda knew LMGs were dying out. :/ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:07, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::: Not overall, it's just the role they are being used in (automatic rifleman). SAW is still very good in defensive role and laying fire on attacking forces ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Heat Dissipation Performance of Carbine Barrel Types? ==<br />
<br />
I was wondering, does anyone know what kind of effects the 'cuts' (originally meant for the mounting of the M203 grenade launcher) in the barrel of the M4 and similiarly-styled M16 & AR-15 series carbines has on the heat dissipation performance of the barrel? Do the cuts help the weapon release heat from prolonged firing better than a barrel that has a uniform thickness, or does it hamper that? Any input anyone can provide on this would be greatly appreciated. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 17:46, 8 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
:The step down for the grenade launcher is actually pretty negligible in terms of cooling (although it does create a point of weakness to bending), as what you can't see is the fact that as soon as the barrel goes under the handguard it is reduced down to the same narrow diameter as in the cut out, which creates a much bigger effect on cooling. The narrower profile sections have the effect of cooling down the barrel quicker, but they also conversely mean that the barrel heats up quicker, and the heat has a larger effect on the accuracy of the gun. The main advantage however is that it reduces the weight quite a bit. The original reason that the M4 barrel reduces in size behind the handguard is based on the M16A2, which does exactly the same thing where its heavy barrel is actually only thicker past the front sight. This was due to a cock up in the design, where they designed the gun with a full thickness straight barrel, and found that they could then no longer clamp the M203 to the barrel, so the barrels were simply turned down from behind the front sight post. The front of the barrel was left thick due to the fact that the thinner barrels on the M16A1 were being bent at the front from being used as pry-bars to get the loading bands off of shipping pallets. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:53, 6 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:There is a heavier "SOCOM-profile" barrel that maintains the same diameter beneath the handguards as the standard M4-profile barrel does around the M203 cut and it can mount the M203 just fine.[http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/v/vspfiles/photos/BCM-URG-M4-14SOCOM-2.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:40, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== can you tell me what model of m16/car 15 this is ==<br />
<br />
sorry i do not have a pic but i can tell you what is like. me and my dad were talikng about some of the guns he used in the army and he was telling me about this one he said was like an carbine version of the m16a2 and it was like the m4 but had a fixed carring handle and it was used befor the m4 it had safe semi and burst and he said it just had ar15 on the side.-Steviebleckley<br />
<br />
:Sounds like the first batch of M4s that were delivered. This is the Colt Model 777, which is basically an M4 with a fixed carry handle, and 3-round burst as opposed to full auto. It is the brother of and visually identical to the 727 mentioned on the main page, where the 727 as full auto as opposed to the burst. If it didn't have the M4 profile barrel though, god knows. Probably a model 654 on an M16 lower receiver or something. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:02, 13 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
yes it had the same profile as the m4. i gess it was the 777.I will show him the pic of the the 727 since there the same well the 727 is full auto thanks for the info - Steviebleckley<br />
<br />
== Question about the buffer tube ==<br />
<br />
I'm not one hundred percent sure what it does, and (like the forward assist) that almost no other guns have it. If someone could just clarify, what does it do, why does this rifle series have it, and why don't others/what replaces the buffer tube in other rifles? Thank you in advance. --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 07:27, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Basically, it was installed in order to slow down the rate of fire. The very first M16s ended up using a different ammunition powder than they were designed for, which caused a higher rate of fire than desired (about 800 to 1000 rpm I think), leading to excessive fouling in the chamber, and hence lots of stopages. From the M16E1 onwards a buffer tube was added to slow the rate of fire to about 600-700 rpm, and a chrome lined chamber and barrel was added as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:47, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
I'm not sure if this is practical in any way, or even possible, but is their a way to increase the rate of fire on an M16 without the problems of the carbon build-up in the chamber?--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:29, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Why would you want to increase the rate of fire? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:40, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
No reason, just wondering if it's even possible with a full-auto M16.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 08:09, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Probably, I see no reason why you couldn't. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:40, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm assuming the reason that the high rate of fire caused fouling was that the rate of fire was so quick that the bolt was unlocking and opening before all the powder was fully burnt in the chamber, leaving residue. I'd imagine that you could increase the rate of fire by removing the buffer, and just make sure that whatever powder you were using was fully burnt in the time it takes the bolt to open. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:29, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::That would make sense, since I heard the nightmare version of that was when the gas pressure was still holding the spent case in place while the extractor was trying to eject it, which tended to result in Horrible Things happening to the case while it was still inside the rifle. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:08, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
This might be a silly question, but why is it that the AR-15 design required the buffer tube, and other rifles do not? Is it just located differently, and if so why? It just strikes me that the lack of a folding stock option is a poor design, especially when compared to most assault rifles designed today, SCAR, ACR, etc. --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 18:57, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm guessing here, but from what I've read it's that the rifle had already been designed, so they had to work inside the box, as it were. The only options were either to make the components of the action a lot heavier so their momentum prevented the weapon cycling too fast (which would rather defy the point of using a lightweight aluminium receiver and suchlike) or add something on to slow it down, which is what they did. Rifles designed since have been designed from the ground up to avoid this kind of problem, so don't need to have a tube attached to a hole in the back of the receiver to fix them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:08, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:The buffer tube does two things: 1) contains the buffer and spring and 2) allows the bolt carrier to recoil part of the way into it. The combination means that the AR15-series rifles are functionally a long-recoil design where the bolt does not slam into anything rigid during recoil and stops based on the pressure of the buffer spring. This--in turn--enhances the straight-line recoil and therefore controllability during automatic fire or rapid semi-automatic fire. It also allows the AR15 design to use the rear of the bolt carrier to actuate the automatic sear meaning the probability in this design that you can set a round off with the bolt unlocked during automatic fire is nil. (Look up some of the problems with the "Lightning Link" to get a better idea of why this works the way it does.)<br />
<br />
:Other designs often do incorporate additional recoil buffers in the stock, the FN FAL's without folding stocks do this and the plastic-stocked SAW's, but the AR15 design simply trades the ability to fold a stock for enhanced recoil handling... The idea behind the design was to make a weapon where the entire recoil force is in a direct line between your shoulder and the end of the barrel with as little jarring as possible. This is also one reason for the use of a direct gas impingement system and one reason why gas-piston AR's tend to eat the front of the buffer tube and buffer tube area of the lower receiver due to bolt carrier "tilt". The "lateral" forces of the piston tapping the top of the bolt carrier misaligns the bolt carrier off its straight line path and pushes that chunk of steel into the aluminum.<br />
<br />
:Oh, and the forward assist is to compensate for not having a rigidly connected bolt handle. (Like someone already mentioned). The reason why is the design is meant to be operated in a manner where you ONLY use the charging handle for initial loading and then unloading at the end (administratively). Every other time, you actuate the bolt using the bolt release on the left side of the weapon... --[[User:Deathbunny|Deathbunny]] 01:28, 11 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Noob Question ==<br />
<br />
Ok I have a really dumb question, what is the difference between the Colt M4A1 and the Colt M4A1 Carbine? Or are they the same exact thing? The only reason I asked is when I was looking at the page, the M4A1 and the M4 Carbine look exactly the same, so how can you tell one from the other? - [[User:1morey]] July 22, 2011 11:21 AM (EST)<br />
<br />
: The M4A1 and M4A1 'Carbine' are the same thing, the 'carbine' is just optionally showing the proper firearm type. As for the M4 and M4A1, well it ''does'' say the difference in the section but to answer - the M4 has Safe-Semi-Burst fire selection ala the M16A2/M16A4, the M4A1 has full-automatic instead of burst, ala the earlier M16s/M16A1/M16A3. Otherwise they're pretty much identical appearance wise (The M4A1 also has a heavier barrel inside the handguard, which of course you can't tell from the outside). It also notes some commercial AR-15 carbines are given an 'M4' moniker, but aren't the same as actual military M4s. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 12:17, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt or not? ==<br />
<br />
If a M4 or M16 variant is listed on a page, should it by prefixed by Colt? I've noticed some people doing this but isn't it incorrect as the term M16 is the army designation as opposed to the Colt name (for example the Colt Model 603 for the M16A1). Either way, I would imagine that quite a few M16s or M4s in movies are manufactured by companies other than Colt, and even the US military rifles are not necessarily made by Colt these days. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:43, 3 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I am curious... if the military M4 and M16 are not made by Colt these days then by whom? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::There was a stretch in the 1990s when Colt lost the military contract and all the M16s were built by Fabrique Nationale (FN). Though many companies build AR15 platforms, only the company who has the contract with the Dept. of Defense can call the M16 theirs. If there ARE any other manufacturers being represented on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, someone needs to find out. I certainly don't have any contacts who would know information which is THAT current. :( [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:48, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::FN have stated that “the vast majority of M16A2, A3 and A4 contracts as well as spare parts contracts for these systems since 1989”, and they had a $7 million contract to make M16A4s between 2005 and 2008. Sabre defence also won a contract for a minimum of 4,952 M16A3 and 702 M16A4 rifles in July 2008 for the US navy/Marine corps respectively. Having said that FN also stated: ”...never was FN Manufacturing LLC, or any other small arms manufacturer, awarded M4 contracts. The M4 cannot be competed and always has been awarded sole source to Colt because of licensing rights restricting full and open competition until 2009” although it has stated its intention to bid for M4 contracts past this point. The US government took ownership of the M4 design on the 1st July 2009, so the M4 can now be manufactured for the government by other companies, but I don't know if this has actually been done yet. Regardless, M4 and M16 are government designations, so surely calling a gun a "Colt M4" is incorrect? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:09, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Just checked the United States Army [http://www.army.mil/features/ official website]. It lists [http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m4.html M4 Carbine] as being manufactured by Colt and [http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m16.html M16 Rifle] by Colt and Fabrique Nationale.<br />
::::Oh, and take a note of M16: ''"The '''M-16A3''' is identical to the M-16A2 but has a removable carrying handle that is mounted on a Picatinny Rail (for better mounting of optics) and is without burst control. The '''M-16A4''' is identical to the M-16A2 except for the removable carrying handle and Picatinny Rail."''<br />
::::United States Marine Corps websites: [http://www.marines.mil/] [http://www.marines.com/] don't mention the current manufacturer for [http://www.marines.com/main/index/winning_battles/gear/weapons_and_equipment/m16 M16 Rifle]. So I am not sure about them. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:24, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Just to throw a bit of confusion in here, there are actually a number of different rifles designated as the M16A3 by the US military. The first is the Colt Model 646, also known as the M16A2E3, which was introduced in small numbers at the same time as the M16A2 and is an A2 with an A1 lower. Then you have the flat-top Colt Model 901 which was introduced at the same time as the M16A4 (in 1994 I think) and I'm assuming this is the version that the above page refers to. You also have the Colt Models 941 and 942 which are the HBAR and HBAR LMG models respectively, but I don't know if they are used. Not that any of this really matters as we identify all these guns as A2/A4 anyway. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:24, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::::Well, that's because armorers don't have access to military M16A3s, so they just slap A2/A4 uppers to A1 lowers (correct?) because what Hollywood film director would want fixed burst firing gun (ignoring the fact that that's what soldiers and marines use) ? Or modify civilian semi-automatic replicas to fully automatic fire. In which case the weapon is to be identified as such. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:54, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Didn't mean to imply we are doing anything wrong, just that the definition of the A3 models isn't that important as they don't appear. Having said that, the original M16A3/M16A2E3 was just an A2 upper on an A1 lower, so this is actually what a number of movie guns are, but I understand that they are going for a standard A2. Regardless, back to my original question, do we call them Colt or not? My opinion is no obviously, as it seems that some if not the majority of M16s are manufactured by other companies, and there is the future possibility of this with M4, and regardless it is a military designation of a rifle that goes by another Colt name. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:31, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::My opinion: M4 & M4A1 should remain as Colt. And so should older M16s. Modern M16s (M16A3 & M16A4), since they have ''at least'' 3 official manufacturers (Colt, Fabrique Nationale and Sabre Defence), should go without Colt. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:37, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== How to NOT shoot an M16 rifle! ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh1lyMyejpI] - Seriously, this is either really funny, or just painful to watch... you decide. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:19, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Wow, that was bad. Glad that guy's alright! - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:46, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Also, notice how many times the gun clicks and the guy keeps saying it's a "bad primer". And then he keeps hitting the forward assist, pulling on the charging handle (which is seen ejecting the unfired rounds) and hitting the bottom of the magazine even though it's already back in the gun after he kept taking it out and putting it back in prior (Someone else in the video even says 'Jesus [name withheld], you don't know how to load these.' and the shooter responds with 'I didn't load these, [name withheld] did.'). I think that could have been a contribution to the gun exploding in his hands. But then again, I'm not the expert on M16 rifles, I'm only guessing. Anyone else got a better explanation? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 17:05, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::It was the shooter saying that the guy who came to help didn't know how to load them, and then that assisting guy said it was someone else. There is nothing wrong with tapping the magazine even when it appears to be seated correctly, as it makes sure it is all the way into the well. Although he did hit forward assist unnecesarily once or twice, I don't think it would have done any harm or contributed to the kaboom. The file description and all the comments say that this was a squib, and it was all the shooters fault for not identifying it and checking the barrel (there are also quite a few people that seem to think it is possible the load 2 or 3 rounds into the chamber at a time by repeatedly pulling the charging handle, but this is Youtube after all). But I don't think it was, as on the first misfire there was only the click of the hammer, and when he pulled the bolt back a round was ejected which wouldn't have been chambered if the previous "bang" was a squib. I've never fired a round with primer but no powder, but surely there would still be an audible "bang" rather than just the click of the hammer? When exactly did the bullet get stuck in the barrel, or am I missing something? Regardless, I would never use ammo I hadn't loaded myself, particularly not done by a friend of a friend. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:33, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::I think it's safe to say that the idea of unintentionally loading 2 or 3 rounds into the chamber of an M16 rifle is an overstatement and pretty much absurd (I've NEVER heard of such a thing happening with the M16 rifles). But one person's explanation in the comments is that when the hammer struck the primers of the "squib" rounds, the 'click' in question was the popping of the primer, which popped with enough force to lodge the bullets into the barrel of the gun, but without the 'bang' sound since the powder of the "squib" rounds were bad. So when the explosion happened, it was because the hammer struck a perfectly fine round, or one with enough charge in it's powder load, and that bullet impacted the other bullets stuck in the barrel, which caused a high-pressure situation ending with the magazine blowing apart, and leaving the M16 rifle damaged (probably for good). Talk about good craftsmanship going to waste! But at least the shooter in the video was not injured in any way. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:51, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::::I could be wrong as have never done it myself (I am not a moron) but I am fairly sure that a primer going off with no powder in the round makes a louder noise than just a click, which is all that is heard in this video. Anyone know how loud just the primer from a .223 would be? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:05, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::::Apparently [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS1K1zJQhOQ this] is a .308 primer. Now bear in mind how far down the audio is turned (as you don't have to wear ear protection when he fires), I can ''kinda'' see that might end up sounding like a click. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:52, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::::::Yeah, most of the time all cameras (except for maybe the professional ones used by filmmakers) capture certain sounds differently. It is possible for the primers of "squib" rounds to discharge with enough force to lodge the bullets into the barrel of whatever gun it's fired from (and sometimes it will stay there until the owner disassembles their weapon and removes the lodged bullet), and most of the time, the "popping" sound of the primers sounds like a "click" when captured on a camera similar to the one used in the video of the M16 blowing up in that guy's face. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:28, 1 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I've seen this video before, looks like the guy was pulling a half-assed SPORTS drill several times while the weapon was malfunctioning on him. But yeah, shooting custom-loaded ammo with no reliable means of quality control is definitely not a good idea, as this video clearly demonstrates. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 23:52, 4 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Not working ==<br />
<br />
Why is the M16 page not working. It locks up my computer, and the network wont respond. It takes about 5 to 10 minutes before it will work.[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]<br />
<br />
:It might be your browser and / or RAM is having trouble with the size of it; this is the largest page on the site. What's the spec of your PC? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:03, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Difference between original M16 and M16A2==<br />
I know how to distinguish XM16E1s, M16A1s, and M16A4s from each other, but how are both the M16 and the M16A2 different visually? Both rifles have no forward assist or removable carrying handles and the M16 can also appear with a "birdcage" flash hider. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:34, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[Image:M16-SP1-30Mag.jpg|thumb|none|500px|M16 aka SP1 (flat "slab side receiver") with an A1 "birdcage" Flash hider - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M16A2.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M16A2 Rifle - 5.56x45mm. Select Fire rifle (Safe/Semi/3 round Burst Only).]]<br />
<br />
:I'll try. Also with the caveat that I have to replace the movie M16s on the site. An IMFDB member whom I am eternally grateful for, pointed out that I had A2 lowers on A1 uppers. Though that works, it's also not correct. I have to replace the M16 pics with exact versions of each one, but that will take time. I just point this out to make sure that people know I'm aware of it.<br />
<br />
1) M16: original USAF contract in Vietnam and in the U.S. slab side upper and lower, 1st pattern duckbill three prong flash hider, original buttstock with foldable rear sling swivel. Early models had counter-turning screws in stead of pivot pins to attach the upper and lower receiver.<br />
<br />
1) XM16E1: 2nd pattern three prong flash hider, Chromed bolt, exposed mag release button (no ribbing) but there is a partial rib for the front pivot detent pin and spring, old M16 style buttstock and rear sling swivel, tear drop forward assist.<br />
<br />
2) M16A1: Birdcage Flash hider, Phosphate bolt but chromed chamber, mag release button ribbing to protect against accidental mag dump and full ribbing to the front pivot detent pin and spring, A1 style buttstock with fixed rear sling swivel (with stowaway compartment in the buttplate)<br />
<br />
3) M16A2: A2 style flash hider with no holes on the lower part, ring washer instead of lock washer, heavy barrel, round forearm, full ribbing on mag release button and front pivot detent pin and spring, front part of lower receiver is beefier and thicker as well as the rear part near the base of the tube ring. Updated and longer (by about 1") rear buttstock and thicker buttplate, slight finger ledge on the pistol grip about midway down. Adjustable rear sights with elevation control as well as side to side. A2 does NOT have a detachable carry handle. <br />
<br />
Hope this helps. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:26, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Don't forget that the M16A2 has semi/3-round burst as opposed to semi/full auto in the M16 (though you rarely see this feature used on-screen as most directors feel the full auto looks better than a 3-round burst). [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 04:15, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
No versions of the M16 has screws rather than push pins at the front of the receiver. The only rifles that have these are the Sporter 1 rifles (which is what all of the pictures on the main page are actually of). The M16s that pre-date the captive push pin (Models 601 and 602) have a large headed push pin that is held in place by a ball detent on the pin itself. Also, the "M16" category can be separated out into 3 different guns which the USAF used seqeuntially in turn. First is the original 601 which has green furniture, original "duckbill" flash hider and triangular charging handle (around 14,500 were made, 8,500 to USAF, 1,000 to the Army for evaluation and the rest to special forces, police, and a number of Asian countries). The 602 is the quintessential slab sided M16, and introduced the updated 3 pronged flash hider, black furniture, the current "T" shaped charging handle. The third "M16" is what is often called the USAF M16 and was the most produced variant, and was the Model 604. Early versions had the M16E1 type partial fence lower, whilst the later versions had the M16A1 full fence lower, and these weapons continued to be used by Air Force until 2001, when all M16s were updated to the A2 standard. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:58, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::Cool! Thanks [[User:Commando552|commando552]] As I've said before, I pulled movie armory weapons. Very rarely do I get access to actual firearms museums, but then 99% of the full auto guns were probably sporter conversions, since it was much easier to convert a title I to a class III gun prior to 1986. I have a LONG laundry list of photos to update thanks to you guys! ;) But the information helps. Also only in recent months have i realized how many franken guns were built in the 1970s/80s and 90s on the M16 platform. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:24, 21 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Pics of the different M16s I mentioned above:<br />
[[File:Colt 601.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 601 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:Colt 602.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 602 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:USAF Colt Model 604.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 604 (USAF M16) - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:48, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Historical Question ==<br />
<br />
Anyone knows why XM177 never dropped the 'X' letter in it? If 'X' usually implies the prototype and testing stage, then why did XM177 have it with both upgrades and use in service, and the jamming M16s in Vietnam didn't? Or some other reasons? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:02, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Ignoring the USAF rifles (which got official GAU designations) the US Army only purchased a few thousand XM177s and the kinks were never really ironed out, so it is fair to call it an XM program still. Rifle was still in development stages really when US Army cut the funding due to Vietnam war involvement being scaled back.. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:27, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Were the Colt Commandos used in Somalia much more refined versions of XM177 program? If yes, I wonder why they were not put back in official service... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:19, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Do you have a pic of them, not sure what rifles you are talking about. If you are talking about the Model 733, that is not really related to the XM177s. US forces purchased a small number of Model 733s for Special Forces and was called the M16A2 commando, although Colt later offered it as the M4 Commando. Rangers and Delta in Somalia also used both Model 723s (A1 rear sight a straight barrel) and 727s (A2 rear sight with M4 profile barrel) and these weapons were known initially as M16A2 carbines, before morphing into the M4. Till the early 90s there were still some Model 653s (called the M16A1 carbine) and XM177s with the long moderators replaced with birdcages knocking around as well, so there were probably a lot of different guns knocking around Somalia. These guns were not refinements though, they were guns from the 60/70s that were still being used due to the fact that the US Army did not produce a standard issue carbine till the M4. I'm not even gonna mention the franken-guns that would have been used by the USAF special forces at the time. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:08, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, thanks, that explains it. [http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_123/449652_going_for_a_1993_Somalia_car15_build_and_need_your_help.html Here are the various photos]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:26, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Carbine/Model 653/Model 727/Model 733 ==<br />
<br />
Firstly, forgive my ignorance in things regarding the variety of AR-15 models. In the model description it says that it was 'never adopted formally by the US Military, and thus never had an "M" or "XM" designation.' However, in the following section where it lists the movies in which we can find this rifle it is often found as the M653. Can someone more knowledgeable either clear up why there is this discrepancy? Thanks --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 18:34, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Editors (and video game developers) often confuse the 'Model', 'M' and 'MK' designations. M653 should be changed to Model 653. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:14, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Correct. Model "___" is the official COLT designation and usually comes first. Only when the weapon is adopted as an official front line weapon does it get the "M" designation. And all these minutia of details in the weapons history STILL gives me a headache! ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:01, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::So does that mean we need to clean up this section to take all the 'M's away?--[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 08:11, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::I've replaced the "M"s with Models --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:22, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Model 978 ==<br />
<br />
'''I took this from Wikipedia, so it might be wrong.''' A lot of video games like to portray the M4A1 with additional burst mode. I read that the Colt Model 978 (a.k.a. "M4 Carbine Enhanced") is an M4 that features a S-1-3-F trigger group. I wonder how popular this variant was/is and most importantly when was it finalized and released? (if it was ever) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 14:15, 25 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:The four position fire selector weapons were adopted by nobody as far as I know, with the exception of Greece who bought the Model 778 (don't know how widespread this was, have just seen a few in some pics), which is basically a Model 727 with the four position selector. You can actually buy parts for a four position selectors, sears and disconnectors from Colt, so guns can be modified to this standard. However, I guarantee you that no guns in games actually have the correct four position selector, as it looks different to the standard one. Can't find any pics right now, but the four position selector is a flat plate with a ridge along the centre that ends in an odd knurled dome, sort of like a citrus juicer.<br />
<br />
:I have also heard of US Special Forces having the four posiiton M4A1s (Model 978), but may just be rumors, and if true there are very few of them and certainly not widespread. They could also be modifications to standard M4s. Below is a pic of the side of a Model 738 M4 Commando Enhanced (Model 733 with the four position selector) showing the selector switch design.<br />
<br />
:--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:37, 25 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:[[File:Colt Model 738.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 738 "M4 Commando Enhanced" fire selector.]]<br />
<br />
:Which games portray the M4A1 with additional burst mode, for example? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:40, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ghost Recon features the normal A1 and the "M4 SOCOM" which has the bonus burst mode. Same in The Sum of All Fears game (both Tom Clancy games). Cannot think of any other games right now. (Maybe I was a little exaggerating when I wrote "a lot of" since in most games you can't even toggle the rof.) So, according to what commando552 wrote, it is possible that the M4A1 with S-1-3-F group in Ghost Recon was intentional, since you control a (fictional) U.S. special force. (And the correct trigger groups: We (at least I) don't take the selectors into account, since in most games you cannot even see them, or are set to safe while the gun goes all rock&roll.)- [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:55, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Well, yeah, the universe of Tom Clancy is the one where the prototypes and ultra rare things come true, including weapons and vehicles, so the presence of AR-15-type firearm with four-position selector switch shouldn't come as surprise ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:48, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Bozitojugg3rn4ut, the selector really should be taken into account, as apart from the receiver markings the selector switch is the only external difference between the regular Colt carbines and the Enhanced version with burst and auto. If it has the regular fire selector and lacks the markings on the receiver, then it is simply and M4 with the wrong fire control group. Is very hard to tell from the Ghost Recon screen shots as there aren't any of the relevant side, but you can just make out that there are only 3 positions marked on the right side of the receiver, making the physical model that of a regular M4/M4A1 rather than an Enhanced M4. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:09, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Interestingly, this discussion is the first result when one Googles "Colt Model 978". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:05, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Main Page ==<br />
<br />
There are 2 issues:<br />
<br />
1) Shouldn't it be called AR-15, since ArmaLite AR-15 is the weapon that started it all?<br />
<br />
2) There is at least 1 not-rifle on the page: [[M16 rifle series#Colt 9mm Submachine Gun|Colt 9mm Submachine Gun]]<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:58, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree, AR-15 makes much more sense to me. I would call the page "AR-15 Variants", gets rid of the problem that "M16" is only relevant 5 or 6 of the 30 or so guns on the page, and the fact that rifle is not necessarily the correct term for all of them. I'm not sure how the site mechanics work, but would changing the name of the page create a massive problem for the 1000+ pages that link here, or would the redirects sort it all out? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:44, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Need to contact admins and ask them about this. I support your version, as more appropriate one. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:17, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Though you are technically correct, M16 is the most widely recognized nomenclature for the weapons that appear in films. Remember that we are not a gun encyclopedia, we are a weapons in MOVIE/TV/et al wiki. Sure, we utilized those rules of starting with the original weapon when it came to more obscure weapons (like grouping the R4s in with the Galils), but really famous weapons have their own pages, weapons that a firmly entrenched with their own identity in the mind of the movie going public. We also did not start a StG-44 page and then branch the AK-47s out from that even though the AKs obviously were a stepchild of the StG-44 Design theory. Very rarely are guns 'presented' as AR-15s in media. In fact many movie goers don't even recognize the term. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 18:13, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::I don't remember many movies where the character says: "Here is my M16!" or where the weapon is listed in closing credits :\<br />
::::The reason for AK-47 not being on the same page as StG-44 is having completely different design. AK-47 was ''inspired'' by StG project, nothing more. There are a lot of weapons that bear a ''resemblance'' to AK-47 or AR-15 but have different design and thus their own page. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:29, 31 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::'''P.S.''' Imagine IMFDB consisting of pages: ''"M1911"'', ''"Desert Eagle"'', ''"MP5"'', ''"Garand"'', ''"M14"'', ''"M16"'', ''"AK-47"'', ''"Everything Else"'' :D<br />
<br />
::::Now, [http://kingshamus.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/official.jpg THIS] made me laugh xD --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:34, 4 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== What is the point of the Colt 9mm SMG? ==<br />
<br />
Every time I look at it just seems so useless. I mean, why would anyone want what is essentially an M4 that does less damage with less range? Recoil would be lower I presume, but I cant see an M4 having a gigantic amount of recoil. I'm sure someone could help provide me with some insight but at the moment I'm finding it very hard pressed to find a purpose of this thing. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 14:20, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:I imagine it had more to do with some guys at Colt wanting to get in on the 9mm subgun market but not wanting to design an entire new platform to do it with. The 9mm round also gives you less penetration, which is good if, say, you're trying to shoot the guy you're aiming at only rather than him and the three things behind him. This is why the majority of people who actually use it are police or police-like units. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:42, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::The main advantage of it is that it is an SMG with the same ergonomics as an AR-15 platform, which makes training easier. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:27, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::9mm is much easier to suppress compared to 5.56. But Evil Tim's answer about Colt not wanting to design a whole new SMG is probably the right one.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 16:13, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M4 Scope optics ==<br />
<br />
Can someone give me some info on what is the standard scope optic for the military, and what is the best scope optic to use on the M4? i was just curious--Gunner5<br />
<br />
:Which military? The M4 is used by a number of them in some capacity. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:53, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
U.S. Military.--Gunner5<br />
<br />
:The most common, I would think, are the ACOG and Aimpoint RDS, but just about any optic can be used on it. As far as what's the best optic to use, "best" is a relative term and depends on the individual shooter and what he/she prefers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:01, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not to mention different optics are more effective in certain situations than others; most ACOGs typically use 4x magnification and are effective for engaging targets at a distance, while red dot sights don't use magnification and are more suited for close-range engagements. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 21:21, 12 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== USE WITH S.A.S ==<br />
<br />
Why does the S.A.S use the M16A2 as their standard rifle? In Bravo Two Zero (the book), Andy McNab calls the M16A2 a 4x4, and the SA80 a Rolls-Royce. Looking back, the S.A.S have a history of using foreign weapons. Why is this? Do Britain not make good enough weapons? Sure, the only thing we currently make and export are Accuraccy International's (which are the best sniper rifles in the world, and I don't care what anyone else says. It strikes me as strange, though, why the S.A.S use the AW50 and not the AS50 as their heavy-caliber sniper rifle), but why do the S.A.S have to use American weapons? Why not use German?<br />
<br />
:"...''have'' to use American weapons?" You have some kind of grudge against American weapons or something? :P In any case, the events of ''Bravo Two Zero'' took place during the first Gulf War, so I really doubt they're still using M16A2s in this age of optics and rail systems. It's my understanding that their ''current'' "standard" long gun is the C8FTHB carbine, which is essentially an M4A1 with a 16" barrel of different profile to that of a standard M4. As to why, well, they use what they ''want'' to use, whether it be British, American, German, whatever. Much like their American counterparts in CAG and DEVGRU, they have the leeway and budget to get a little bit of everything because their mission calls for it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 7 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The SAS adopted the M16 as a replacement for the 7.62 L1A1 SLR which was the standard British rifle at the time. The SLR was superior in terms of reliability, accuracy and range, but the M16 had a major weight advantage in terms of both the weapon and the ammunition, could mount a grenade launcher, and was capable of automatic fire (so was the SLR, but a match was required to be inserted into the action). One of the reasons they continued to use it after the introduction of the SA80 rifles was due to initial reliability problems, along with the fact that until relatively recently the SA80 culd not use an underbarrel grenade launcher (M16s were also used by other units, such as some Royal Marine units and the Pathfinders). Don't really know the exact reason why the SAS (along with Military Police and Royal Marine close protection along with a few others) use the C8SFW/CQB rather than the SA80 but would imagine it is partially due to the lower weight and the modularity of the SFW (bear in mind that the SA80 didn't have a railed forened until a few years ago and has only just gotten a MIL-STD-1913 on the top for different sights). Unlike the M16s adopted before, the C8 has actually been officially adopted by the MOD as the L119A1 (both the SFW and the CQB share the same designation though). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:17, 7 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::L119A1 is the official designation for C8 SFW in British SF service. C8 CQB is just its variant. An analogy would be M4A1 (official service) and Colt Commando (unofficial service). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:50, 8 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::::The Colt Commando moniker has never been attached to the M4, it's been primarily used to refer to previous A1-pattern carbines like the XM177 series. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:30, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::::Colt currently markets the Model 933 as the M4 Commando, and several models have the "M4 Commando" rollmarks on the left side of the lower receiver as well. It is a bit messed up though also being stamped as the "M16A2 Commando" (making no sense as it is a flattop), or simply "M4LE" on law enforcement Commandos. The Commandos in particular demonstrate the practice of cobbling guns together from whatever bits are available. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:44, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::::Colt adopted the M4 designation as a marketing ploy, the 11.5" 933 isn't used by the military in any capacity that I know of and not likely to start since those that need shorter barrels already have access to even ''shorter'' 10.3" CQBR URGs and 10.5" Mark 18s, neither of which are M4s since they don't match the physical specs of an M4. Heck, I can pull up a pic of a flat-topped GUU-5/P that to the untrained (or uncaring) eye would be identified as an M4A1, but isn't because it uses a slab-sided pre-A1 lower receiver. A lot of M4A1s in use by SOCOM units also can't technically by Colt naming standards be considered M4s since SOCOM now has 12.5" URGs for use on M4 lowers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:55, 29 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Delta Force used the weapon, when it was known as 'M16A2 Commando' (CAR-15 in article), in Somalia.[http://www.guns.com/the-us-special-forces-and-their-guns-and-gear-or-at-least-the-stuff-we-know-about.html] I'd also recommend to get the book "Weapons of Delta Force" by Fred Pushies.<br />
:::::::Force Recon also knows Model 733 as 'Colt Commando'.[http://www.forcerecon.com/strongmenarmed3.htm]<br />
:::::::In essence, more modern (meaning, without older parts) M4 CQBR and M4 Commando are just that. M4 Carbine with shorter barrel. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:52, 29 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Another reason the SAS don't use the SA80 is because you cannot use it in your left hand and they prefer to be able to use a weapon in both hands as it's better for shooting from behind cover. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 13:12, 12 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::"Why not use German?" Aside from the fact that if you say SAS most people with think of "Black Kit" with an MP5, there is still some rumours flying around about them using the 416 and 417. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 04:30, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Probably thrown around by HK's PR department, they sold a ton of MP5s off the back of the SAS using them to break up the Iranian Embassy Siege. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:20, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Using the HK416 might be BS, but British Special Forces do use the HK417. It was bought a few years ago as a DM rifle before the army got the L129A1. It was also more widely tested by the Royal Marines in the role, but was replaced when the L129A1 was adopted. [http://www.eliteukforces.info/images/gallery/uksf/sfsg-multicam-hr.jpg Here] is a photo of an SFSG team, the guy second from the left in the first row has a suppressed HK417. They guy behing may also have one, but can only make out the stock so could be another AR-15 pattern rifle. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:51, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::::::He's got a Minimi Para with a PIP stock like the guy second from the right in the front row; you can see the iron sight against his shirt. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 11:50, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Page Title ==<br />
<br />
While this page contains many weapons based on the AR-15, shouldn't it be called "AR-15 family of weapons" or something like than rather that just "M16 rifle series"? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 12:36, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:Look 4 topics above this one. If it was up to me I would call it "AR-15 rifle series" or something like that, but MPM2008 made the point that although this would be technically correct the average person coming to site would be much more familiar with the term M16, which is fair enough. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:53, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sniper Rifles? ==<br />
<br />
How are we defining "Sniper Rifles" for [[:Category:Sniper Rifle]]. It seems to me that all the guns on this page are Assault Rifles. I know that you can certainly convert an M16 to a sniper rifle but all the images seem to be of Assault rifles. Just curious! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:47, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:The main rifle on here that I would class as a sniper rifle is the Mk 12 SPR but there are also the Vietnam-era M16 sniper variants, the Model 655 and 656. There are also some "target" AR-15s like the Colt Accurized Rifle and the Match Target Competitions that I would probably class as sniper rifles if I had to put them into a category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 20:21, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Sadly, it seems that Colt has discontinued the Colt Accurized Rifle for the time being. I checked my old link on the [[SWAT 4]] page and it no longer works, nor is the Colt Accurized Rifle anywhere to be found on their product page sections of their website (maybe it just couldn't compete with similar products from other companies?). I was hoping the Colt Accurized Rifle would have been included on this page--I guess that won't be the case now, for how can a firearm be included here on this wiki if it failed to make much of an impact (to the point that it was discontinued) and thus won't be in many pieces of audio-visual media? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 21:57, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::I missed the Mk 12 SPR. I 100% agree with you on that one, that is DEFINATELY a sniper. Thanks for clarifying! Any change we could could put a definition on the [[:Category:Sniper Rifle]] page like the one that is on the [[:Category:Assault Rifle]] page? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:28, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::The 655 and 656 were full-auto capable, so I wouldn't exactly lump them in as sniper rifles. Same goes for the Mark 12, if you want to get technical. The Mark 12 grew out of a program to create a SOPMOD upper receiver component that the shooter could switch out with his M4 upper when in need of increased range and accuracy. So in its original form, the SPR was still technically an assault rifle (and as such it's still frequently used in that manner by SOF who switch out uppers on full-auto lowers), it just had a high-magnification scope, and we all know that just sticking a scope on an AR doesn't make it a sniper rifle. It didn't lose its full auto capability until it was type-classified as an individual weapon. Mark 12s in regular grunts' hands would likely be dedicated sniper rifles, but those you see in use by SOF are more than likely just SPR uppers on M4 lowers. There's a similar distinction between Mark 18s (complete type-classified weapon with 10.5" uppers on refurbished M16A1 lowers) and "M4A1 CQBRs" (10.3" uppers on M4 lowers). [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:55, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Just because something has full automatic capability doesn't mean it is not a sniper rifle. It is unusual and arguably unnecessary, but as far as I know there is no official definition of what a sniper rifle does and does not have. In my opinion it is a sniper rifle if it is designed for and used in the sniping role. Hell, you can even call small caliber stuff like the Ruger 10/22 a sniper rifle as it has been used as one. For the purposes of this site though, I think the category should be used if the rifle ''appears'' to be a sniper rifle to the average user who might be trying to identify something. In other words, a catch all term for sniper, designated marksman, target and hunting rifles. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 21:14, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:I was under the impression that a dedicated sniper rifle had to have (at a minimum) a scope, be chambered in a full-size rifle round (so as to allow for accurate distant shots with high stopping power, a key part of sniping), be ergonomically suited for use while prone (i.e., its magazine must not be so large as to create an obstruction when lying on the ground on your stomach, and preferably have a bipod) and allow for accurate semi-automatic/bolt-action fire (fully-automatic or burst-fire is possible but counter-productive for accurate long-range shots, and such capability is usually reserved for Designated Marksmen who must travel with a squad and still keep some close-quarters firepower if necessary). So something like the VSS Vintorez wouldn't count because its round is short-ranged (up to 400 meters only given its subsonic velocity, so it's more of an accurized "special purpose" assault rifle), while the SVD would, due to its scope, 7.62x54mmR caliber, small magazine size to ensure it doesn't get in the way when used while prone (I'm very confused as to why the Soviets never put a bipod on the SVD, however), and semiautomatic-only nature. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 21:57, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::As we only have the sniper rifle category here, I would class the VSS Vintorez as such, as it is designed as a suppressed sniper rifle. By virtue of the fact that it is suppressed it uses a lower power shorter range cartridge than a typical sniper rifle, but not all sniping is long range. If you were to use an integrally suppressed [[Accuracy_International_Arctic_Warfare_series#Accuracy_International_Arctic_Warfare_Suppressed|AWS]] with subsonic ammunition the range would be limited like on the Vintorez, but that doesn't mean it is no longer a sniper rifle. In particular, for police and some special forces uses long range is not as important in a sniper rifle as accuracy and other considerations. Like I said before, silenced Ruger 10/22s have been used by special forces for almost silent sniping. Another example would be the Russian SV-99, which is a silent sniper rifle based on a .22LR biathlon rifle. Weapons like these are specialized sniper rifles, but they are still sniper rifles none the less. I'm not sure whether trying to make a fixed definition for a sniper rifle is a good idea, as you will always find exceptions. Not all "sniper rifles" even use telescopic sights, an example being the Barrett M82A2 which uses a 1x red dot sight as it was actually designed for shooting from the shoulder as a low cost anti helicopter weapon. Another rifle that breaks your definition would be the [[BMS Milcam Rifle Series|BMS Snicam]] which is undeniably a sniper rifle, but uses a 5.56mm cartridge from 20/30 round STANAG magazine. Different sniper rifles have wildly different characteristics depending on the specific task they are designed for. The only thing I can say about what should be in the sniper rifle category is if it looks like one, put it in there. This isn't an encyclopaedia, the idea of the categories is to help people identify unknown guns, so if it looks like a sniper rifle that is the category they will be looking in. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:13, 19 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About charging handle ==<br />
<br />
From [http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/11/foghorn/ask-foghorn-what-does-a-forward-assist-do/ The Truth About Guns]:<br />
<br />
''"Ever since, part of the military’s manual of arms for loading the M16 and its variants includes a mandatory smacking of the charging handle even if it isn’t necessary."''<br />
<br />
Is it about racking the charging handle? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:51, 28 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That is a mistake, smacking the charging handle does nothing on an AR-15. As it had previously been talking about the introduction of the forward assist (the button on the right rear of the upper receiver), I assume it is meant to say ''"Ever since, part of the military’s manual of arms for loading the M16 and its variants includes a mandatory smacking of the '''forward assist''' even if it isn’t necessary."'' --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:01, 28 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ah, thanks for the explanation. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:50, 28 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:M16_rifle_series&diff=539047Talk:M16 rifle series2012-03-28T12:50:55Z<p>Masterius: /* About charging handle */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Screen Used Rifles==<br />
[[Image:M16A1M203ScarfaceCombo.jpg |thumb|none|600px|World IMFDB Exclusive: Screen used Faux M203 Launcher with M16A1 with Quadrant and Front ladder sight - 5.56x45mm. This is verified screen used from the film ''[[Scarface]]''. Two 30 round magazines have been taped together with black gaffer's tape to emulate the way Tony Montana loaded his weapon in the film. What is interesting is that the tape in the movie does really appear to be motion picture gaffer's tape, which would only be common on ... a movie set.]]<br />
[[Image:M4_SWAT-1-.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M4A1 with ACOG scope and Surefire M500AB weaponlight. This is one of the screen-used weapons seen in ''[[S.W.A.T. (film)|S.W.A.T.]]'' - 5.56x45mm.]]<br />
[[Image:UVARCarbine.jpg|thumb|600px|none|CAR-15 like the one used in ''[[Uncommon Valor]]'' - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:BattleLA M16A4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M16A4 (5.56x45mm) with ACOG scope, RIS foregrip, Magpul MBUS rear sight, and AN/PEQ-15 IR designator as seen in ''[[Battle: Los Angeles]]'']]<br />
[[Image:Colt Law Enforcement Model 6920 Carbine..jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Law Enforcement Carbine with ACOG scope and PentagonLight MD3R weaponlight, screen-used weapon from ''[[I Am Legend]]'' - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
<br />
==Additional Variants==<br />
[[Image:CustomNorthHollywoodAR15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Custom AR-15/M16 Hybrid gun (5.56x45mm) made to resemble the firearm used by Emil Matasareanu in the 1997 North Hollywood Bank Of America Shootout, represented in the film ''[[44_Minutes:_The_North_Hollywood_Shootout|44 Minutes:The North Hollywood Shootout.]]'']]<br />
[[Image:OlympicArmsAR15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|An Olympic Arms AR15 (note: Olympic arms did not renamed their rifles with the "K" designation until after the 1990s) with A2 Handguards and the Olympic Arms stowaway pistol grip - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M203xm177.jpg|thumb|none|600px|XM177 - 5.56x45mm with M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:model 656.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M16A1 with 20-round magazine, fitted with scope - 5.56x45mm]] <br />
[[Image:M4 m203 old.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 727 - 5.56x45mm with [[M203 grenade launcher]] - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:607-2-sm-741x267.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 607 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:Mockcommando.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt XM177E2 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:GUU-5P.jpg|thumb|none|600px|GUU-5/P - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M148.jpg|thumb|none|600px|XM177E2 - 5.56x45mm with a mounted [[XM148 grenade launcher]] - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:K3B.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Olympic Arms K3B carbine - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:101-rifle-c8fthb-carbine-6.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Canada C8A3 Carbine with EOTech red dot sight - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M16A4M203ACOG.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Artwork of an M16A4 rifle - 5.56x45mm with ACOG scope and M203 grenade launcher - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:M653M203.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 653 5.56x45mm with magazine removed and M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:Cam15a4tacticalcarbine.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Classic Army M15A4 airsoft carbine rifle - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:RRA DEA.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Rock River Arms Tactical CAR-A4 Carbine 5.56mm with EOTech sight]]<br />
[[File:Model 633 SMG DOE.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt 9mm SMG DOE (Model 633), shortened variant of the Model 635 produced for the Department Of Energy - 9x19mm]]<br />
<br />
==Airsoft Replicas==<br />
[[Image:CAXM177.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A Classic Army XM177 airsoft replica rifle - 5.56x45mm (of the type used by SF troops in some scenes of the movie ''[[Green Zone]]'').]]<br />
[[Image:XM177_shorty.jpg|thumb|none|600px|CAR-15 SMG AIRSOFT RIFLE - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:Icsm4ris2006.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M4A1 AIRSOFT RIFLE with a RIS foregrip and AN/PEQ-2 IR designator - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:Colt AR15 Match Target Competition HBAR II 6731.jpg|thumb|600px|none|Colt AR15 Match Target HBAR II (Model MT6731) - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
This is the marushin cap gun?--[[User:Kin93|Kin93]] 07:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
::Yes, you are right, it is, so this is one of the FIRST guns I need to photograph (a real one) and replace this Airsoft abomination. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
Actually thats a ICS airsoft M4 with the grip and laser box....<br />
<br />
An airsoft gun and a cap gun aren't the same thing. LOL [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:43, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Interesting ==<br />
...I seriously doubt anyone will ever see an underslung version of the M203 used in a film, all by itself, ...<br />
<br />
but there have been stand alone M203 launchers (modified with a pistol grip and stock like the M79LF 37mm launchers) as well as the M203 being attached to guns other than the M16 (take Rambo III for example where they attached it to an AK). Having a section on the M16 w M203 on the M16 page makes sense since that is where people will look if they're curious about that particular combo appearing in a movie. But I like having a separate page for the M203 to address more detailed history of the launcher plus any applications where the launcher is used with other weapons. Just a thought...<br />
::We do need a page where M203s are used as stand alone launchers, rare, but it has happened. But we should shift all M203s underslung to M16s to the M16 Page and have a note directing users to that page when looking for that combination on the M203 page. Just IMHO.... [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Makes sense, that configuration. Also, there was a standalone M203 on Bones, and there might be others (sometime WAY in the future, when a director wants to use a "modern" version of an M79, like how James Cameron used the fictional roto-craft in place of the Huey).<br />
<br />
== Do well really need to have an "A2" and "A3" category?==<br />
<br />
[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] has already explained that just about all of the "M16A2s" used in movies are actually A2 uppers on A1 lowers, often with A1 flash hiders. By this definition, none of them are true "M16A2s", and might actually be considered M16A3s roughly. But since they're usually seen impersonating M16A2s, I say designate by receiver style only (both the A2 and A3 have what is usually called the "A2 receiver").<br />
<br />
In other words, I think we should ditch the M16A3 category completely. It makes no sense to distinguish between A2s and A3s when basically all of the "Hollywood" A2s and A3s are the same type of gun. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 20:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I never got anyone's feedback on this, but...I decided to go ahead and ditch the M16A3 entry, for the reasons I explained above. It doesn't make sense to try and distinguish between "A2s" and "A3s" in movies when MoviePropMaster has explained that they're all basically the same thing - A2-style uppers on fully automatic A1 lowers. By that definition, none of them are true "M16A2s", but since they're obviously supposed to portray such rifles in movies, it makes more sense to call them A2s. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I agree, because the M16A3 was made for Navy SEALs and SeeBees, no civilian hands hae touched them. -Winchester (1-26-09)<br />
I believe the 1995 remake of Village of the Damned portrayed the National Guard using burst fire. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 03:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
(the above was in reply to a comment that the author deleted as i posted.) --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 03:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Also I think Colt sold A3s to foreign entities, National police of allied countries, Elite units, etc. Any country with which we are friendly and Colt has sold weapons in the past. I've heard that A3s were sold as samples to France, U.K. and Germany (but that was a casual comment that I heard years ago). There 'could' be A3s in the armories of foreign movie productions. That is a completely grey area with which I have no one to verify anything. :( [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 05:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:This is strange. I posted a comment here a couple hours ago, asking how many movies are there were burst fire is portrayed? I know Black Hawk Down has one instant. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
::I've seen some films that had three round burst fire. I will try to get the titles and list them [[Special:Contributions/205.172.16.102|205.172.16.102]] 01:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is a significant difference between a true A2 and A3 M16. Externally, they look identical, however the A3 is full auto and the A2 is 3 shot burst. Simply put: A1 and A3 are full auto, A2 and A4 are 3 shot burst. The external differences are what make it a little easier to identify. We all know what an A1, A2, and A4 M16 look like, but the A3 is just an A2 that is full auto. Hope this helps; Its my first time posting. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:14, 29 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The caption to the M16A1 w/ M16A2 handguards... ==<br />
I was in the National Guard in the early '90's and that's exactly what we had. I was also issued an M16A1 with A2 handguards in basic training. It turns out that it's simpler and--from what I heard--cheaper to replace the 'A1 guards with 'A2 guards because the 'A2's are less complex and you only need to stock one type instead of 'lefts' and 'rights'. Also, the 'A1'a in the national guard were freshly rebuilt, tested, and had the serial numbers laser etched into the bolt carriers. They were issued with all 'A2 furniture.<br />
<br />
:Yeah, I've seen plenty of A1s with A2 hand guards elsewhere. In fact, if you ever watch footage of the current offensive into Gaza, you can see both IDF personnel and Hamas militants using them. The Israelis received a lot of M16A1s and have updated many of them with the M16A2 hand guards. Many of these rifles were passed into Israeli's "allies" in Fatah, and then Hamas stole plenty of them during their war with Fatah (some were also probably stolen from the IDF themselves). -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 22:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
just for the record here is an M16A1 with A2 handguards in service <br />
[[Image:RP Marines assault line DM-SD-06-10463.JPEG|thumb|none|600px|RP Marines armed with M16A1s with A2 handguards.]] <br />
--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 22:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Mark 12 Special Purpose Rifle ==<br />
<br />
Does anyone have an image of one?<br />
-[[User:AdAstra2009]]<br />
<br />
:I put one on the ''[[Live Free or Die Hard]]'' page that I took from another site. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks I pasted it from that page but we should probably look into getting a noncopyrighted one.<br />
-[[User:AdAstra2009]]<br />
<br />
::Well, you can ask MoviePropMaster2008 if he has a Mark 12 upper in his company's inventory. I imagine he also knows armorers at Cinema Weaponry (the guys who supplied the weapons for ''[[Live Free or Die Hard]]''), so he might even be able to get us one of the same guns used in that movie. But he's very busy of course and has LOTS of other image requests to tend to, so it might be a while before he gets around to it. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
== Rate of Fire on the M16A1 ==<br />
Does anyone know the rate of fire on the M16A1?[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 22:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I assume it's about 800 rounds a minute [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 08:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:That would be correct, it's around 750 to 800 RPM. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== What is this? ==<br />
It's not really from a movie, but a music video, and I havn't been able to figure out what this AR is yet, there are two others in the video, one's an M16A1, the other an A2, but I just can't figure this one out.<br />
<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle1.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle2.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle3.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle4.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle5.JPG<br />
<br />
Looks like an M733, what is this from? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 08:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
:The gun in the first 'cap looks different from the CAR-15s in the other pictures. Maybe it's a fake XM177?-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 12:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
::It's from the music video for Hero Of War by Rise Against, the main soldier uses it, his two buddies use an M16A1 and M16A2, I'm almost 100% sure there are only three rifles in the video. Yeah, I'm thinking M733 too... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]]<br />
<br />
==XM607 Commando Carbine==<br />
I do remember the weapon from ''[[Pink Cadillac]]'' an XM607, or an AR-15 modified to imitate one. The weapon may not have been officially adopted but kits were released to the public though:<br />
<br />
* [http://totalsilenceinc.com/XM607_pages/questions.html 1]<br />
* [http://www.retroblackrifle.com/ModGde/CrbGde/607.html 2]<br />
* [http://www.fototime.com/A2FFCE89093C8E7/standard.jpg 3]<br />
<br />
[[User:Cutaway|Cutaway]] 18:54PM, 3/7/2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I changed the entry after I watched the trailer for the movie. The trailer is on YouTube, and the gun in question is visible at the 00:27-00:28 mark:<br />
<br />
:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LddykTA8nVg<br />
<br />
:That is definitely an older-model LaFrance Specialties M16K. It doesn't have the triangular front sight post of the XM607. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 18:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==The Photoshopped M16 images==<br />
<br />
Can people '''please''' stop posting the images of M16 variants that were edited using MPM's photos? There's a reason I've removed them before. We don't need to have every variant on the page, and many of them are inaccurate, anyway. The only one we allow is the XM16E1, because we don't have a good photo of one of those yet, and even that may get replaced. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
*The Colt 607 image I posted wasn't one of MPM's [unless someone stole it and re-hosted it], I got it from google. Only put it here because the page for the The World Is Not Enough videogame didn't have a 607 image. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 05:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why do we have Colt Model 727 by itself==<br />
When the Model 727 is just the commercial Colt name for the M4 carbine? it doesn't make sense to have the exact GUN made by Colt with it's commercial name (for law enforcement sales or international sales) with a separate category, when it should just be merged in with the M4/M4A1 category. The M16 page is getting out of control. MPM2008<br />
<br />
:I agree that the Model 727 should be merged with the M4 category, but it's not exactly a commercial name for an M4. The Model 777 is the commercial name for the very first M4 (the one that didn't have the detachable carry handle). The 727 and 777 are identical, but the 727 is safe-semi-auto and the 777 is safe-semi-burst. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
:::Good point. But in the overall view, I think all that info (a) should be in the M4 category, (b) should be a footnote, NOT a separate category and (c) people are endlessly creating separate categories for weapons that are essentially the same guns as other categories. Experienced IMFDB users/Mods already know that most of the M16 variants seen in films are build ups of other guns. We usually just get the accessories and barreled uppers and put them on our full auto or semi auto lowers. Why spend thousands to get new guns when we're sitting on dozens and dozens of other M16s? Also, in VideoGames and Anime, again, they don't have to specify the new or commercial model unless it's specifically stated or named explicitly. Even then it can be a footnote in the original category. <br />
<br />
==Adding images==<br />
<br />
I'm getting a little annoyed with people adding images we don't need on the page, including many that are crap and which aren't necessary. Not to mention that half of them aren't even using the "<nowiki>br clear=all</nowiki>" command to ensure that the images won't drift into the next gun entry. So, I'm putting a stop to this now. No more without talking about it here first. Next person who doesn't respect my wishes gets a 1-week time out. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 17:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:They're still doing it. I have removed the custom A1 upper mounted on an SP1 lower with A2 handguards from this page several times. It is not a common real like frankengun (but it has happened). I originally built this and photographed it for the HEAT page until better screenshots proved that Wes Studi's AR15 was an A1 style lower, not an SP1. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I couldn't agree more, for some reason, these users seem to think that every single picture of a gun needs to be on it's page. It especially frustrates me when they're sticking all customized guns that only appear in one movie onto a page, they may look cool, but they're not even standard configurations! All they end up doing is turning the gun page into a cluttered, sloppy mess of pictures, I mean just look at the [[Remington 870]] and [[Mossberg 500]] pages.--[[User:Alienqueen11|Alienqueen11]] 22:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Would it be alright if I added the following image to the [[M16 rifle series#M4/M4A1 with M203 Grenade Launcher|M4/M4A1 with M203 Grenade Launcher]] section?<br />
<br />
[[Image:Sopmod m4 m203 06.jpg|thumb|none|350px|M4A1 5.56x45mm with M68 Aimpoint red dot scope, flip-up rear sight, and M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
<br />
Figured that since the other sections on the page have pics of the 'basic' and 'tricked-out' versions, why not this one? [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 21:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Does anyone have any pictures of a heavily modified M4 style platform? ex- The Unit, BlackHawk Down, Tears of the Sun? [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 17:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
So why not update this page to include current issue M16A4 rifles?<br />
(unless you don't know what they are....)<br />
<br />
==A Warm Thank-You==<br />
For years I have been trying to find out what the guns were Peter & Roger used in Dawn of the Dead. This site solved what the problem so many other "gun experts" on IMDb could not. Again, thank you.<br />
:Thats what IMFDB is for =) --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 18:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Let's See If You Can Figure This Out==<br />
I couldn't find a real picture so I put this together. Its an M4A1 with the old style stock, and a straight (no cuts) 16" barrel; or its a Sporter (or one of those older three number ones like that) with a removable carry handle; take your pick. I was just wondering what it actually is...<br />
<br />
P.S. Every detail is intentional and exactly how its supposed to be even though its not a real picture, just so everyone knows that. ;)<br />
[[Image:M4A1COD4.jpg]]<br />
<br />
:It would be a hybrid commercial AR variant. It has an M16A1 style lower receiver, so it is NOT a Sporter I or II. Basically, it's an M4 Carbine with a flat top and detachable carry handle, with an old style buttstock and a civilian HBAR Carbine barrel outfitted with RIS forearms. Various manufacturers made similar guns to this design, like Bushmaster and a few others. Also many builders of AR15s made similar guns from parts kits from M&A, Patriot Arms, (the now defunct Nesard), Sun Valley, and others. With the advent of custom builds from aftermarket parts from dozens of manufacturers, the AR15 has become the ultimate "mutt". I can tell you this is NOT an issued military variant, so it would NOT have an "M" designation unless it was built from an M4 to begin with. Also nearly everyone uses the step down M4 style barrels for carbines, unless it's the ultra light. The HBAR Carbine style barrels are becoming rarer by the day since their heyday was the 1990s. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Thanks a lot, very informative answer. This is the "M4 Carbine" in Call Of Duty 4, and I've been trying to figure out exactly what it really is for a while. I didnt say where it was from because I figured the answer I'd get would be something like "its a videogame, so its probably not a real model", but I knew that ;) I like the look and have been trying to make it as an airsoft project, this helps a lot... too bad airsoft HBAR barrels are very hard to come by. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::How did you make that? At first I thought it was Pimp My Gun, but PMG doesn't have an M16A1 pistol grip yet. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::No, you thought right my friend, it is Pimp My Gun, I just used MS Paint to remove the little finger nub and made the HBAR barrel by copying and pasting the largest part of the barrel over the rest of it. That's all the "photoshopping" that I did. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:45, 13 <br />
February 2010 (UTC)<br />
::If it's from CoD4, then blame lack of details on modelers that made that gun model. They simply saved some poligons for improved performance of the game. Same thing with lack of gas-block when front sight is removed. It supposed to be M4A1 and i'm 100% sure they had pictures of military issued M4A1's as a reference.<br />
:::I'm sure they wanted it to be an M4A1, but I've seen a lot of movies where HK94s were converted to be MP5s, or 92FSs were converted to be 93Rs and last I checked on this site we identify guns on what they are, not what they're supposed to be... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== M16A1 series' portray ==<br />
<br />
In the present, does anyone think that like the Ak47 and its variants, the M16A1 series is sometimes stereotypically portrayed as a bad guy's gun?<br />
I've seen the IRA, FARC guerillas, Mexican drug lords and some gangbangers use them.<br />
Overall is this true?<br />
:In the real world, the USSR dumped millions of AKs into the hands of satellite states and insurgents around the world. In the Vietnam and immediate post Vietnam years the U.S. dumped millions of M16A1s to our allies. With the fall of Vietnam, all of the South Vietnamese M16A1s ended up in the hands of communist guerillas (as well as the AK). The AK and the M16 were the most prolifically distributed weapons of the last 50 years. There is no conspiracy to make them 'look bad'. They're in the hands of everyone so it is invevitable.<br />
:Even Iran uses a variant of the M16A1, a copy of the Norinco CQ called the ''S-5.56'', as their standard rifle. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== AR Series firing 5.7 Ammo??? ==<br />
<br />
I was in a gun shop in Michigan today and saw a weapon with an AR-15 type body but with the mag of a P-90 running along the rail. I asked the guy at the shop and he did confirm the weapon did fire the 5.7 round. Anyone have any idea who makes the weapon and what it may be called? Incidentally the store was The Firing Line in Westland Michigan. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 03:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
::They sell those uppers here in California all the time. My local gun store has 5.7mm firing AR15 uppers that take the P90 magazine. But I never bothered to check who made it, that's what GOOGLE is for. I just never had an interest [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I have seen examples of this conversion as well. It is actually a specially-made upper receiver that can be mounted onto pretty much any AR-15 style lower receiver. The magazine mounts along the top of the weapon as with the P90, and the original magazine well in the lower receiver becomes the ejection port with the spent brass falling down through there instead of being spit out to the side. As for the manufacturer, I can't quite recall who makes it, but it is definitely quite an interesting piece of hardware. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 07:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As long as my memory goes, is called the AR-57 and is manufactured by 57Center, or something like that --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I remember when Impact Guns got those in. You can buy them here: http://www.impactguns.com/store/AR-57%20UR.html<br />
<br />
::The manufacturer's web site, as Yocapo32 pointed out, is 57 Center. Their web site is here: http://www.57center.com/<br />
<br />
::What's interesting is that the AR magazine well is where the brass gets ejected. The only problem I can see with having a P90 magazine mounted on top is that it leaves limited rail space on top for mounting accessories. You could have a scope or iron sights, and not much else. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 15:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the info guys, again, I know this was not germane to the topic, it was just a little odd to see something like that as I had never heard of it before. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 16:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Stolen M4A1s==<br />
<br />
In real life is there ever any incidents where police have seized M4A1 carbines from criminials or terrorists during raids?<br />
<br />
:Do you mean mil-spec M4s, as opposed to semi-auto AR-15 carbines that are patterned after the M4? I would doubt it. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 21:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Never, or else it has never been reported anywhere, ever. And I am talking about real select fire 14.5" barreled M4/M4A1 carbines. However, California has had a rash of MP5s and MP5Ks stolen out of police cars, which were left unlocked when the cops were in a strip club. Seriously. they have not shown up since....[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Suitable combat weapon==<br />
<br />
Which weapon is considered better for infantry? An M16A1/M203 combo or an OICW?<br />
:M16A1/M203. The XM29 weighs damn near 20 lbs., compared to 8 or 9 lbs. for the M16 when fitted with a 203. Fire control system or not, the last thing I'd want to be stuck with on a 60 mile march is an F-ing 20 lbs. rifle. And sign your posts by typing four '''~''' after them. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 23:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The M16/M203 combo is definitely superior; it has been proven in real-world combat situations over the last 30-plus years, whereas the only live-fire situation the XM29 has seen at the most is at the Aberdeen testing ranges. The closest replacement the M16/M203 will likely see anytime soon is an [[FN SCAR]]/[[Heckler & Koch M320|M320]], and even then the SCAR is only in limited use with the 75th Ranger Regiment at present. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 05:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The real question is whether or not the XM8 Carbine is better than the M4A1/derivatives (H&K 416, REC7, etc). And we probably won't ever know. <br />
<br />
Also, the OICW was more of a man-portable version of a Doom gun than anything that you would actually bother carrying on duty. 20mm airburst auto-loader, saboted sub-5.56mm rounds? What could you use that for other than trying to clear a drug cartel's fortified mansion by yourself?<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]<br />
<br />
:One of the many things that led to the death of the XM29 was its sheer size. The Army wanted it scaled down to the size of an M4 [http://www.ghostrecon.net/images_arms/xm29_1.jpg] and 14 lbs max (which an M4 with all its mods gets pretty close to), but with today's technology, it just wasn't possible. Maybe in 20 years or so it will be, but the XM29 is presently dead for the foreseeable future. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Installation of a front Flip up/down Iron sights. ==<br />
<br />
I was watching The Losers, and while I agree that those 4 characters all had M4A1s, they seemed to switch between fixed front sight and flip up/down iron sights. I was wondering how hard it would be to take an M4A1, remove the front factory sight and replace it with a flip up/down sight. I know it's pretty easy for the rear sight, but I wasn't sure about the front sight. (OK, I also want to ask this question because I, like many people, have played Modern Warfare 2 and seen the M4 with a flip up/down front sight.) --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
:Not really that difficult. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
:I believe the process would involve removing the muzzle brake and the existing front sight/gas block assembly and replacing it with a gas block that has either a rail to mount your choice of front sight, or a folding front sight, then reinstalling the muzzle brake. You can find instructional videos for this process at various gunsmithing websites. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 14:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Forward Assist ==<br />
Does anyone know when reloading if it is a good idea to hit the forward assist after hitting the bolt release or its ok just to start firing after hitting the bolt release?<br />
<br />
:The idea behind hitting the forward assist after reloading is to ensure the bolt is fully seated and that the weapon is ready to fire. It's generally not really nessicary at the range, but when in a combat situation where you might have dirt or whatnot fouling the chamber, it's a good idea to do that to ensure that the weapon will fire when you need it to.[[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 23:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The M16 series are the ONLY assault rifles (except the [http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:g41-series&catid=8:the-automatic-rifles&Itemid=5/ HK G41], which is made to be like the M16 and is no longer produced) in the world to have a forward assist. Why don't other assault rifles have a forward assist? (ie. the AK-74, G36 etc.) Because other assault rifles are more reliable and don't need it. :)<br />
::Uh more associated with the design of the Bolt than being more reliable. The AK series have a bolt handle attached DIRECTLY to the bolt carrier as do many other designs. If there is debris or fouling in the chamber which keeps a round from seating properly you can just jam the handle forward (I've done this in the field when my AK / Garand / Galil / M 14 / etc jammed) I once had a tiny piece of bark (I was firing under trees) which fell from above and fell into the ejection port and made the round 'stick' really badly in the chamber so that it would not seat properly. The M16 design has no way other than the forward assist to nudge the bolt & carrier forward enough to fire and kick that crap free of the action. But I wouldn't bash the M16 as an "unreliable" rifle. I'd sure take it into battle right now. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
:::Alright, I understand. thanks for the extra info. I'm not saying the M16/M4 is a complete piece of crap, but it's definitely not the BEST ASSAULT RIFLE IN THE WORLD! like we Americans like to state all the time (*rolls eyes*). You and me both know the M16/M4 is no where as reliable as the G36 or the AK series. But at least it's better than the L85 series, now that's a piece crap rifle. :D *Edit: Well at least the L85A1, the L85A2 is OK. kinda like the M16/M16A1s sucks but the M16A2/A4s are good.<br />
<br />
::::I have to completely disagree with what you say, i don't wish to come off as passive aggresive but you sound like a mall ninja that learned their weapons knowledge from seeing them perform in videogames or hearing public opinions on weapons from the news or other sources. The M16 family of rifles are both fine and fairly reliable weapons, while much of that view has been skewed by the fact they were portrayed as unreliable during conflicts such as Vietnam, is incorrect to a degree. The M16 is a reliable and capable weapon when cleaned and properly maintained, it simply lacks the ability to stay so when not properly serviced, as some other rifles such as the AKM can function fine without cleaning, the M16 can not. As for your comment on the L85 series, yes they were somewhat poor and unreliable weapons at first, coupled with poor grips and clumsy to handle for certain users, however the newer models have made large improvements and are very capable firearms. As i feel it needs to be said (or typed) a common mistake people make is assuming that militaries have access and funding to field their troops with the best weapons available, which is not always the case as most countries don't have the money to field an Army with rifles that can cost up to $5000-10000 per unit. Which is where the workhorses like M16's come in, you go for the "good" rifle not the "great" one. Also, although off-topic it somewhat pertains to the M16, most mall ninja's assume the AK-family is better because it is more reliable and fires a heavier cartridge, I've always asked "would you want a round that's going to pierce right through an enemy and leave an easy to treat wound, or have a round that hits an enemy and fragments inside them causing an ungodly bloody mess?" Hopefully esteemed imfdb members such as MPM2008 will agree with and share my viewpoint concerning this subject, as well as not condemn me for my long comment. [[User:Doc345|Doc345]] 13:24, 06 March 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::The issues of jamming during the Vietnam War had more to do with ammunition and the lack of a chrome-lined chamber and barrel than the rifle's so-called "dirty" gas system. In 1964 the Army switched from stick powder to ball powder, which increased the rate of fire to over 1,000 RPM and left a lot of dirty residue in the weapon. This was only exacerbated by the lack of cleaning kits and training on how to maintain the weapon. They fixed the issue by fitting the rifle with a buffer system (which slowed the ROF down) and chrome-plated chamber. Training programs in weapon maintenance were instituted and an instruction book on how to maintain the rifle was circulated among troops. After further modifications resulted in the M16A1, many of the reliability issues disappeared (although even today, the weapon has yet to shed its bad reputation). The M16A2, A3, A4, and M4 carbine of today are an entirely different breed of warrior than the prototypes that were issued back in the 60s. While it may admittedly be a bit finicky, the M16 today is a good weapon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:29, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Yeah but it's still a very fussy weapon, it's not very durable, and it has much more malfunctions/jams then say the H&K G36, but none the less it's still a excellent weapons platform, mostly. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I was always taught that the forward assist, while useful in combat, in situations where dirt or grime can jam a weapon, overall, if you DO need to use it, its a good indication of a malfunction and should be addressed, especially if its at a range. Theres a video somewhere on youtube, of a guy shooting some sort of AR, and repeatedly hits the forward assist, without clearing or checking the bore, until the entire gun explodes, probably from a round hitting one stuck in the bore. -MissySummers- 18:47, 8 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== The comment about the SPR Mk 12 shooting full auto... ==<br />
<br />
The design--at least the original ones--used a match grade trigger group that actually fired full auto.<br />
<br />
If my Web Fu is correct, NSN 1005-01-562-0901 from Knight's Armament. <br />
<br />
The original, intended purpose was to allow the uppers to be swapped out for a short barreled model initially so a marksman could use a short range weapon on the way in and out and the more accurate upper at the objective.<br />
<br />
Sources: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=003aa7475e95c9b56d5814227cc5d4ec&tab=core&_cview=0<br />
<br />
::https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fbd46923c9e6d18cd916b8a6e7d3cfdf&tab=core&_cview=0 <br />
<br />
States the Special Purpose Receiver (Early designs) specifies:<br />
<br />
"(C) OTHER PERFORMANCE GOALS: (1) Increased reliability, durability, corrosion resistance, ease of cleaning, lubricity/reduced friction; fully functional for a minimum of 15,000 rounds (Threshold)/30,000 rounds (Objective), performing up to the standards and firing rates to be published in the Solicitation, functional reliability exceeding that of the standard M4A1 carbine at high and low temperature extremes as well as other hostile (sand/dust/dirt/mud/surf) environmental conditions (2) Improved safety- delay cook-off, fail-safe features, fires/functions safely and without delay of draining in the Over-The-Beach (surf zone, weapon flooded with water) environment. (3) User Acceptance: operational suitability, increased live-fire hit scores, decreased live-fire engagement times, speed/accuracy of engagement, '''controllability in semi-automatic and full automatic fire''', improved handling qualities, light weight, snag free in movement through vegetation and battlefield obstacles." (Accent added)"<br />
<br />
== Standard Issue M4 vs. M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
Does the Army issue regular infantry (i.e. 4th Inf. Div.) the three-round burst M4 or the M4A1? I always thought it was the M4A1 (and please forgive me if I got to the party late), but from what I've read, it seems like they issue the regulars the Model 920, leaving the 921 for Special Forces and the like. -<br />
<br />
i think it all depends on the on-base armory. for example some armory's might still have some M4s. but i think the regular infantry does use the M4A1. however. Special forces dont use the M4A1 or the M4. they use the hK416/417. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 17:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:- Though I don't know for certain, I wouldn't imply Spec-Ops units use ''only'' the new HK rifles - As you've said, it all depends on what's around, and to a degree what the soldiers prefer (in the case of Special units). Though the aforementioned HK rifles are in inventory, that doesn't automatically cancel the M4s out - some personnel might still use 'em. Plus there are other weapons around, namely the FN SCAR series. Though I would agree use of the M4 with Special Forces probably isn't as common these days.<br> As for a regular-issue weapon, I agree that the M4 and M4A1 are both in use nowadays, with the A1 perhaps being more prominent. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 19:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Actually, Stan, my understanding is that it's the opposite. The M4 is the most common version, not the M4A1. U.S. military doctrine still discourages full-auto for infantry rifles, so it seems unlikely to me that the M4A1 is going to be more common. As for the SCAR, SOCOM just decided this past June that they weren't going to order any more SCAR-Ls for the foreseeable future, which means that even amongst most SF units, the M4 will remain their standard weapon. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:- Well, I wasn't too sure, but I guess that does make sense to stick with the burst-fire M4. Good point. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 01:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The only SF unit that uses the M4 (920) that I can think of is the Asymmetric Warfare Group, but that's only 'cause they had to hand in their HK416s. According to a book I've got, that decision went over like a lead balloon with the AWG. -<br />
<br />
thank god. im not a huge fan of the SCAR-L i find it pointless. if you want to go with a new alternative to the M4/M16. why the hell would you take an unfamiliar weapon. alas the hK416. same rate of fire. same Picatanny rail, same attachments, same stock, same barrel, same trigger group, and extremely similiar internals. and Stan, i do agree. if i made it sounds like all SF use the hK416, i didnt mean to. i/we really DONT no what they all use. they pick their own. they could carry an AK-47 or a CAR-15 if they wanted to. we cant make generalizations about units that get custom made equipment. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 20:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
- No prob, dude - I'm just glad you got what I was gettin' at. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 20:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
i would be shocked if they couldnt pick their weapons. their the best soldiers on the planet. it just doesnt make sense not to be able to. it would be like giving a star baseball player a 10 dollar glove. itll do but why wouldnt they get the best thats out there. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 01:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Reg army units use the burst M4, not the full auto A1. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
A couple of months ago when I was at a military base there were Marines conducting a weapons demo with the M4 carbine. It was the 3-round burst rifle, but a question came up about the M4A1. One Marine said that they got rid of all M4A1s and only have M4s. I personally don't see the need for a full-auto rifle and 3-round burst is fine because it forces the user to slow down and most of the time the user uses semi-only, combat or not, but that is my opinion. The M4A1 is still probabley used by the US Military, but I'm not sure, I haven't seen one in a long time.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:29, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Accurized Rifle ==<br />
<br />
After seeing several pages of real firearms appearing in only one film or game, I was wondering if I should expand this page with a new section for the [http://www.colt.com/law/car.asp Colt Accurized Rifle], which to my knowledge has only ever appeared in [[S.W.A.T. 4]]. Before I do that, I need to confirm two things: <br />
<br />
*Is the Colt Accurized Rifle indeed another variant on the M16 line of rifles, or a separate take on the AR-15 design altogether? I suppose there's a reason why we don't include the [[Z-M LR 300]] in the M16 page because it's the latter--I need to know if the Colt Accurized Rifle falls in that category.<br />
*Including it on this page would make it the first Designated Marksman Rifle variant here. So far I only see assault rifles or carbines here. Would including a DMR in this page be a problem or not? <br />
<br />
If there are no real problems, I'll make a new section for it, but I have no idea where I'll get a non-copyright infringment image of one. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 01:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:It'd be the '''second''' DMR on the page. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the info, but can someone confirm that the Colt Accurized Rifle is indeed descended from the M16 line of assault rifles and not a separate take on the AR-15 design like the aforementioned LR-300 is? I still have no idea where I can get a photo of this DMR that respects copyright. All I have are game screenshots. Some help here, please? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 22:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Removeable Carry Handle for Colt 9mm SMG? ==<br />
<br />
Does such a Gun exist?<br />
<br />
:Not as a production gun (Colt's website makes no mention of one, anyway), but the modular nature of the AR system makes such a configuration entirely possible. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why do we have a Colt AR-15 SP1 category that is separate from the M16/SP1 category?==<br />
The guns look the same, sure the SP1 had a design change in 1978 (three prong flash hider was changed to birdcage, rear sling swivel was changed to A1 style and the color went from greenish grey to straight grey) but unless we see the stamp on the side that says "Property of U.S. Government" we can't tell if it's a real M16 (which WERE sold via Title II dealers to armories) and a Colt AR15 SP1 which was converted to full auto (which was done A LOT prior to 1986). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 19:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== About M4 Commando and M16A4 Full Auto ==<br />
<br />
Full Auto M16A4 (Model 905) is [http://www.colt.com/mil/M16_2.asp Model 901]<br />
<br />
[http://www.colt.com/mil/M4Com_2.asp Model 933] ''is'' M4 Commando (Full Auto)<br />
<br />
[http://www.colt.com/mil/home.asp Manufacturer's site] says it all.<br />
<br />
== Colt Model 653 barrel length ==<br />
<br />
Am trying to pin down what a gun is for a page I'm working on. It has a forward assist but no deflector, A1 rear sight, M4 length tubular handguard, 16" barrel with birdcage flash hider and a solid stock. Basically it matches the gun in the picture for the Model 653 on the main page, apart from having a solid stock but that is easily changeable. However, every source I can find about the 653 says that it has a 14" barrel. Was the gun made in different barrel lengths but kept the same designation, and if not, anyone know what the gun is that is pictured as a 653? Also, while I'm on the topic of obscure colt carbines, does anyone know of a model that will match a 725 (original C8 without the flat-top) but has an A2 rear sight? Thanks, --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:16, 16 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Can anyone figure out what this is? ==<br />
<br />
I found this hidden in my computer, I think it's a Colt Canada C7A1 as a base, I can tell it's C7 because of the Canadian leaf on the the lower receiver, it would be an A1 because of the removable carrying-handle. What the heck is that hand-guard? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:02, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[Image:Colt Canada C7A1 SPW.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Canada C7A1 SPW?]]<br />
<br />
:Colt Model 750/Diemaco C7 Light Support Weapon - A modified C7 with an enlarged gas tube (hence the square handguard) and a heavy barrel for sustained fire in the squad automatic weapon role. The C7 LSW is not used by the Canadian Forces but has seen service with the Dutch and Danish militaries. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 01:34, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ha! I thought so, thanks. :) Should I remove this section or keep it. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:53, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That's not Colt LSW, that's [http://www.colt.com/mil/CAR.asp Colt Automatic Rifle]. Follow the link and you will see that the image is the larger version of the official one. Meanwhile, [http://www.coltcanada.com/lsw-page.htm Colt LSW] has optional folding carry handle. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:09, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Thanks guys. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 12:02, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Just to clarify, the Colt automatic rifle, LSW and LMG are all the same weapon. The original version that looks like the one above was the Colt Model 750, which featured a fixed A2 carry handle and barrel mounted bi-pod, and the newer version above is the current production Model 950, with the relocated bi-pod and A4 rear sights. As you said, the folding carry handle is removeable, and the picture on the Colt website is just one without it fitted (note the longer centre vent on the top of the handguard is the mounting point for the handle). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 02:48, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::The original version was based on M16A1:<br />
<br />
::[[File:M16A1 CAR.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
<br />
::The one you described was based on M16A2:<br />
<br />
::[[File:M16A2 CAR.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
<br />
Guys, remember back in the 1980s when Colt was trying to vie for the SAW role? Sure the FN Minimi was never knocked off its perch, but Colt came out with a Colt light Machine gun that looked a lot like this. They were selling the barreled uppers on the market for a while in the early 1990s (I know a few friends who have them, but I never got one). This looks like that reincarnated!!! LOL![[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:24, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, that's all written on [http://world.guns.ru/machine/usa/m16-lsw-lmg-e.html Modern Firearms] :P<br />
<br />
::Ah yes, you only read about it monkeyboy ;) I was handling and firing that sucker! LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:11, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, and I've found articles of why AR is more advantageous than SAW to US Marine Corps:<br />
<br />
:[http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/m249-employment-concepts M249 Employment Concepts]<br />
:[http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/m249-light-machinegun-automatic-rifle-role The M249 Light Machinegun In The Automatic Rifle Role]<br />
<br />
:Interesting reading, methinks :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 30 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yeah it was. :) You know, I kinda knew LMGs were dying out. :/ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:07, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::: Not overall, it's just the role they are being used in (automatic rifleman). SAW is still very good in defensive role and laying fire on attacking forces ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Heat Dissipation Performance of Carbine Barrel Types? ==<br />
<br />
I was wondering, does anyone know what kind of effects the 'cuts' (originally meant for the mounting of the M203 grenade launcher) in the barrel of the M4 and similiarly-styled M16 & AR-15 series carbines has on the heat dissipation performance of the barrel? Do the cuts help the weapon release heat from prolonged firing better than a barrel that has a uniform thickness, or does it hamper that? Any input anyone can provide on this would be greatly appreciated. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 17:46, 8 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
:The step down for the grenade launcher is actually pretty negligible in terms of cooling (although it does create a point of weakness to bending), as what you can't see is the fact that as soon as the barrel goes under the handguard it is reduced down to the same narrow diameter as in the cut out, which creates a much bigger effect on cooling. The narrower profile sections have the effect of cooling down the barrel quicker, but they also conversely mean that the barrel heats up quicker, and the heat has a larger effect on the accuracy of the gun. The main advantage however is that it reduces the weight quite a bit. The original reason that the M4 barrel reduces in size behind the handguard is based on the M16A2, which does exactly the same thing where its heavy barrel is actually only thicker past the front sight. This was due to a cock up in the design, where they designed the gun with a full thickness straight barrel, and found that they could then no longer clamp the M203 to the barrel, so the barrels were simply turned down from behind the front sight post. The front of the barrel was left thick due to the fact that the thinner barrels on the M16A1 were being bent at the front from being used as pry-bars to get the loading bands off of shipping pallets. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:53, 6 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:There is a heavier "SOCOM-profile" barrel that maintains the same diameter beneath the handguards as the standard M4-profile barrel does around the M203 cut and it can mount the M203 just fine.[http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/v/vspfiles/photos/BCM-URG-M4-14SOCOM-2.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:40, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== can you tell me what model of m16/car 15 this is ==<br />
<br />
sorry i do not have a pic but i can tell you what is like. me and my dad were talikng about some of the guns he used in the army and he was telling me about this one he said was like an carbine version of the m16a2 and it was like the m4 but had a fixed carring handle and it was used befor the m4 it had safe semi and burst and he said it just had ar15 on the side.-Steviebleckley<br />
<br />
:Sounds like the first batch of M4s that were delivered. This is the Colt Model 777, which is basically an M4 with a fixed carry handle, and 3-round burst as opposed to full auto. It is the brother of and visually identical to the 727 mentioned on the main page, where the 727 as full auto as opposed to the burst. If it didn't have the M4 profile barrel though, god knows. Probably a model 654 on an M16 lower receiver or something. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:02, 13 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
yes it had the same profile as the m4. i gess it was the 777.I will show him the pic of the the 727 since there the same well the 727 is full auto thanks for the info - Steviebleckley<br />
<br />
== Question about the buffer tube ==<br />
<br />
I'm not one hundred percent sure what it does, and (like the forward assist) that almost no other guns have it. If someone could just clarify, what does it do, why does this rifle series have it, and why don't others/what replaces the buffer tube in other rifles? Thank you in advance. --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 07:27, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Basically, it was installed in order to slow down the rate of fire. The very first M16s ended up using a different ammunition powder than they were designed for, which caused a higher rate of fire than desired (about 800 to 1000 rpm I think), leading to excessive fouling in the chamber, and hence lots of stopages. From the M16E1 onwards a buffer tube was added to slow the rate of fire to about 600-700 rpm, and a chrome lined chamber and barrel was added as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:47, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
I'm not sure if this is practical in any way, or even possible, but is their a way to increase the rate of fire on an M16 without the problems of the carbon build-up in the chamber?--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:29, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Why would you want to increase the rate of fire? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:40, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
No reason, just wondering if it's even possible with a full-auto M16.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 08:09, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Probably, I see no reason why you couldn't. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:40, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm assuming the reason that the high rate of fire caused fouling was that the rate of fire was so quick that the bolt was unlocking and opening before all the powder was fully burnt in the chamber, leaving residue. I'd imagine that you could increase the rate of fire by removing the buffer, and just make sure that whatever powder you were using was fully burnt in the time it takes the bolt to open. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:29, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::That would make sense, since I heard the nightmare version of that was when the gas pressure was still holding the spent case in place while the extractor was trying to eject it, which tended to result in Horrible Things happening to the case while it was still inside the rifle. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:08, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
This might be a silly question, but why is it that the AR-15 design required the buffer tube, and other rifles do not? Is it just located differently, and if so why? It just strikes me that the lack of a folding stock option is a poor design, especially when compared to most assault rifles designed today, SCAR, ACR, etc. --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 18:57, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm guessing here, but from what I've read it's that the rifle had already been designed, so they had to work inside the box, as it were. The only options were either to make the components of the action a lot heavier so their momentum prevented the weapon cycling too fast (which would rather defy the point of using a lightweight aluminium receiver and suchlike) or add something on to slow it down, which is what they did. Rifles designed since have been designed from the ground up to avoid this kind of problem, so don't need to have a tube attached to a hole in the back of the receiver to fix them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:08, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:The buffer tube does two things: 1) contains the buffer and spring and 2) allows the bolt carrier to recoil part of the way into it. The combination means that the AR15-series rifles are functionally a long-recoil design where the bolt does not slam into anything rigid during recoil and stops based on the pressure of the buffer spring. This--in turn--enhances the straight-line recoil and therefore controllability during automatic fire or rapid semi-automatic fire. It also allows the AR15 design to use the rear of the bolt carrier to actuate the automatic sear meaning the probability in this design that you can set a round off with the bolt unlocked during automatic fire is nil. (Look up some of the problems with the "Lightning Link" to get a better idea of why this works the way it does.)<br />
<br />
:Other designs often do incorporate additional recoil buffers in the stock, the FN FAL's without folding stocks do this and the plastic-stocked SAW's, but the AR15 design simply trades the ability to fold a stock for enhanced recoil handling... The idea behind the design was to make a weapon where the entire recoil force is in a direct line between your shoulder and the end of the barrel with as little jarring as possible. This is also one reason for the use of a direct gas impingement system and one reason why gas-piston AR's tend to eat the front of the buffer tube and buffer tube area of the lower receiver due to bolt carrier "tilt". The "lateral" forces of the piston tapping the top of the bolt carrier misaligns the bolt carrier off its straight line path and pushes that chunk of steel into the aluminum.<br />
<br />
:Oh, and the forward assist is to compensate for not having a rigidly connected bolt handle. (Like someone already mentioned). The reason why is the design is meant to be operated in a manner where you ONLY use the charging handle for initial loading and then unloading at the end (administratively). Every other time, you actuate the bolt using the bolt release on the left side of the weapon... --[[User:Deathbunny|Deathbunny]] 01:28, 11 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Noob Question ==<br />
<br />
Ok I have a really dumb question, what is the difference between the Colt M4A1 and the Colt M4A1 Carbine? Or are they the same exact thing? The only reason I asked is when I was looking at the page, the M4A1 and the M4 Carbine look exactly the same, so how can you tell one from the other? - [[User:1morey]] July 22, 2011 11:21 AM (EST)<br />
<br />
: The M4A1 and M4A1 'Carbine' are the same thing, the 'carbine' is just optionally showing the proper firearm type. As for the M4 and M4A1, well it ''does'' say the difference in the section but to answer - the M4 has Safe-Semi-Burst fire selection ala the M16A2/M16A4, the M4A1 has full-automatic instead of burst, ala the earlier M16s/M16A1/M16A3. Otherwise they're pretty much identical appearance wise (The M4A1 also has a heavier barrel inside the handguard, which of course you can't tell from the outside). It also notes some commercial AR-15 carbines are given an 'M4' moniker, but aren't the same as actual military M4s. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 12:17, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt or not? ==<br />
<br />
If a M4 or M16 variant is listed on a page, should it by prefixed by Colt? I've noticed some people doing this but isn't it incorrect as the term M16 is the army designation as opposed to the Colt name (for example the Colt Model 603 for the M16A1). Either way, I would imagine that quite a few M16s or M4s in movies are manufactured by companies other than Colt, and even the US military rifles are not necessarily made by Colt these days. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:43, 3 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I am curious... if the military M4 and M16 are not made by Colt these days then by whom? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::There was a stretch in the 1990s when Colt lost the military contract and all the M16s were built by Fabrique Nationale (FN). Though many companies build AR15 platforms, only the company who has the contract with the Dept. of Defense can call the M16 theirs. If there ARE any other manufacturers being represented on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, someone needs to find out. I certainly don't have any contacts who would know information which is THAT current. :( [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:48, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::FN have stated that “the vast majority of M16A2, A3 and A4 contracts as well as spare parts contracts for these systems since 1989”, and they had a $7 million contract to make M16A4s between 2005 and 2008. Sabre defence also won a contract for a minimum of 4,952 M16A3 and 702 M16A4 rifles in July 2008 for the US navy/Marine corps respectively. Having said that FN also stated: ”...never was FN Manufacturing LLC, or any other small arms manufacturer, awarded M4 contracts. The M4 cannot be competed and always has been awarded sole source to Colt because of licensing rights restricting full and open competition until 2009” although it has stated its intention to bid for M4 contracts past this point. The US government took ownership of the M4 design on the 1st July 2009, so the M4 can now be manufactured for the government by other companies, but I don't know if this has actually been done yet. Regardless, M4 and M16 are government designations, so surely calling a gun a "Colt M4" is incorrect? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:09, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Just checked the United States Army [http://www.army.mil/features/ official website]. It lists [http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m4.html M4 Carbine] as being manufactured by Colt and [http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m16.html M16 Rifle] by Colt and Fabrique Nationale.<br />
::::Oh, and take a note of M16: ''"The '''M-16A3''' is identical to the M-16A2 but has a removable carrying handle that is mounted on a Picatinny Rail (for better mounting of optics) and is without burst control. The '''M-16A4''' is identical to the M-16A2 except for the removable carrying handle and Picatinny Rail."''<br />
::::United States Marine Corps websites: [http://www.marines.mil/] [http://www.marines.com/] don't mention the current manufacturer for [http://www.marines.com/main/index/winning_battles/gear/weapons_and_equipment/m16 M16 Rifle]. So I am not sure about them. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:24, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Just to throw a bit of confusion in here, there are actually a number of different rifles designated as the M16A3 by the US military. The first is the Colt Model 646, also known as the M16A2E3, which was introduced in small numbers at the same time as the M16A2 and is an A2 with an A1 lower. Then you have the flat-top Colt Model 901 which was introduced at the same time as the M16A4 (in 1994 I think) and I'm assuming this is the version that the above page refers to. You also have the Colt Models 941 and 942 which are the HBAR and HBAR LMG models respectively, but I don't know if they are used. Not that any of this really matters as we identify all these guns as A2/A4 anyway. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:24, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::::Well, that's because armorers don't have access to military M16A3s, so they just slap A2/A4 uppers to A1 lowers (correct?) because what Hollywood film director would want fixed burst firing gun (ignoring the fact that that's what soldiers and marines use) ? Or modify civilian semi-automatic replicas to fully automatic fire. In which case the weapon is to be identified as such. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:54, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Didn't mean to imply we are doing anything wrong, just that the definition of the A3 models isn't that important as they don't appear. Having said that, the original M16A3/M16A2E3 was just an A2 upper on an A1 lower, so this is actually what a number of movie guns are, but I understand that they are going for a standard A2. Regardless, back to my original question, do we call them Colt or not? My opinion is no obviously, as it seems that some if not the majority of M16s are manufactured by other companies, and there is the future possibility of this with M4, and regardless it is a military designation of a rifle that goes by another Colt name. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:31, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::My opinion: M4 & M4A1 should remain as Colt. And so should older M16s. Modern M16s (M16A3 & M16A4), since they have ''at least'' 3 official manufacturers (Colt, Fabrique Nationale and Sabre Defence), should go without Colt. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:37, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== How to NOT shoot an M16 rifle! ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh1lyMyejpI] - Seriously, this is either really funny, or just painful to watch... you decide. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:19, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Wow, that was bad. Glad that guy's alright! - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:46, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Also, notice how many times the gun clicks and the guy keeps saying it's a "bad primer". And then he keeps hitting the forward assist, pulling on the charging handle (which is seen ejecting the unfired rounds) and hitting the bottom of the magazine even though it's already back in the gun after he kept taking it out and putting it back in prior (Someone else in the video even says 'Jesus [name withheld], you don't know how to load these.' and the shooter responds with 'I didn't load these, [name withheld] did.'). I think that could have been a contribution to the gun exploding in his hands. But then again, I'm not the expert on M16 rifles, I'm only guessing. Anyone else got a better explanation? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 17:05, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::It was the shooter saying that the guy who came to help didn't know how to load them, and then that assisting guy said it was someone else. There is nothing wrong with tapping the magazine even when it appears to be seated correctly, as it makes sure it is all the way into the well. Although he did hit forward assist unnecesarily once or twice, I don't think it would have done any harm or contributed to the kaboom. The file description and all the comments say that this was a squib, and it was all the shooters fault for not identifying it and checking the barrel (there are also quite a few people that seem to think it is possible the load 2 or 3 rounds into the chamber at a time by repeatedly pulling the charging handle, but this is Youtube after all). But I don't think it was, as on the first misfire there was only the click of the hammer, and when he pulled the bolt back a round was ejected which wouldn't have been chambered if the previous "bang" was a squib. I've never fired a round with primer but no powder, but surely there would still be an audible "bang" rather than just the click of the hammer? When exactly did the bullet get stuck in the barrel, or am I missing something? Regardless, I would never use ammo I hadn't loaded myself, particularly not done by a friend of a friend. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:33, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::I think it's safe to say that the idea of unintentionally loading 2 or 3 rounds into the chamber of an M16 rifle is an overstatement and pretty much absurd (I've NEVER heard of such a thing happening with the M16 rifles). But one person's explanation in the comments is that when the hammer struck the primers of the "squib" rounds, the 'click' in question was the popping of the primer, which popped with enough force to lodge the bullets into the barrel of the gun, but without the 'bang' sound since the powder of the "squib" rounds were bad. So when the explosion happened, it was because the hammer struck a perfectly fine round, or one with enough charge in it's powder load, and that bullet impacted the other bullets stuck in the barrel, which caused a high-pressure situation ending with the magazine blowing apart, and leaving the M16 rifle damaged (probably for good). Talk about good craftsmanship going to waste! But at least the shooter in the video was not injured in any way. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:51, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::::I could be wrong as have never done it myself (I am not a moron) but I am fairly sure that a primer going off with no powder in the round makes a louder noise than just a click, which is all that is heard in this video. Anyone know how loud just the primer from a .223 would be? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:05, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::::Apparently [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS1K1zJQhOQ this] is a .308 primer. Now bear in mind how far down the audio is turned (as you don't have to wear ear protection when he fires), I can ''kinda'' see that might end up sounding like a click. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:52, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::::::Yeah, most of the time all cameras (except for maybe the professional ones used by filmmakers) capture certain sounds differently. It is possible for the primers of "squib" rounds to discharge with enough force to lodge the bullets into the barrel of whatever gun it's fired from (and sometimes it will stay there until the owner disassembles their weapon and removes the lodged bullet), and most of the time, the "popping" sound of the primers sounds like a "click" when captured on a camera similar to the one used in the video of the M16 blowing up in that guy's face. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:28, 1 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I've seen this video before, looks like the guy was pulling a half-assed SPORTS drill several times while the weapon was malfunctioning on him. But yeah, shooting custom-loaded ammo with no reliable means of quality control is definitely not a good idea, as this video clearly demonstrates. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 23:52, 4 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Not working ==<br />
<br />
Why is the M16 page not working. It locks up my computer, and the network wont respond. It takes about 5 to 10 minutes before it will work.[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]<br />
<br />
:It might be your browser and / or RAM is having trouble with the size of it; this is the largest page on the site. What's the spec of your PC? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:03, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Difference between original M16 and M16A2==<br />
I know how to distinguish XM16E1s, M16A1s, and M16A4s from each other, but how are both the M16 and the M16A2 different visually? Both rifles have no forward assist or removable carrying handles and the M16 can also appear with a "birdcage" flash hider. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:34, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[Image:M16-SP1-30Mag.jpg|thumb|none|500px|M16 aka SP1 (flat "slab side receiver") with an A1 "birdcage" Flash hider - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M16A2.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M16A2 Rifle - 5.56x45mm. Select Fire rifle (Safe/Semi/3 round Burst Only).]]<br />
<br />
:I'll try. Also with the caveat that I have to replace the movie M16s on the site. An IMFDB member whom I am eternally grateful for, pointed out that I had A2 lowers on A1 uppers. Though that works, it's also not correct. I have to replace the M16 pics with exact versions of each one, but that will take time. I just point this out to make sure that people know I'm aware of it.<br />
<br />
1) M16: original USAF contract in Vietnam and in the U.S. slab side upper and lower, 1st pattern duckbill three prong flash hider, original buttstock with foldable rear sling swivel. Early models had counter-turning screws in stead of pivot pins to attach the upper and lower receiver.<br />
<br />
1) XM16E1: 2nd pattern three prong flash hider, Chromed bolt, exposed mag release button (no ribbing) but there is a partial rib for the front pivot detent pin and spring, old M16 style buttstock and rear sling swivel, tear drop forward assist.<br />
<br />
2) M16A1: Birdcage Flash hider, Phosphate bolt but chromed chamber, mag release button ribbing to protect against accidental mag dump and full ribbing to the front pivot detent pin and spring, A1 style buttstock with fixed rear sling swivel (with stowaway compartment in the buttplate)<br />
<br />
3) M16A2: A2 style flash hider with no holes on the lower part, ring washer instead of lock washer, heavy barrel, round forearm, full ribbing on mag release button and front pivot detent pin and spring, front part of lower receiver is beefier and thicker as well as the rear part near the base of the tube ring. Updated and longer (by about 1") rear buttstock and thicker buttplate, slight finger ledge on the pistol grip about midway down. Adjustable rear sights with elevation control as well as side to side. A2 does NOT have a detachable carry handle. <br />
<br />
Hope this helps. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:26, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Don't forget that the M16A2 has semi/3-round burst as opposed to semi/full auto in the M16 (though you rarely see this feature used on-screen as most directors feel the full auto looks better than a 3-round burst). [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 04:15, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
No versions of the M16 has screws rather than push pins at the front of the receiver. The only rifles that have these are the Sporter 1 rifles (which is what all of the pictures on the main page are actually of). The M16s that pre-date the captive push pin (Models 601 and 602) have a large headed push pin that is held in place by a ball detent on the pin itself. Also, the "M16" category can be separated out into 3 different guns which the USAF used seqeuntially in turn. First is the original 601 which has green furniture, original "duckbill" flash hider and triangular charging handle (around 14,500 were made, 8,500 to USAF, 1,000 to the Army for evaluation and the rest to special forces, police, and a number of Asian countries). The 602 is the quintessential slab sided M16, and introduced the updated 3 pronged flash hider, black furniture, the current "T" shaped charging handle. The third "M16" is what is often called the USAF M16 and was the most produced variant, and was the Model 604. Early versions had the M16E1 type partial fence lower, whilst the later versions had the M16A1 full fence lower, and these weapons continued to be used by Air Force until 2001, when all M16s were updated to the A2 standard. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:58, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::Cool! Thanks [[User:Commando552|commando552]] As I've said before, I pulled movie armory weapons. Very rarely do I get access to actual firearms museums, but then 99% of the full auto guns were probably sporter conversions, since it was much easier to convert a title I to a class III gun prior to 1986. I have a LONG laundry list of photos to update thanks to you guys! ;) But the information helps. Also only in recent months have i realized how many franken guns were built in the 1970s/80s and 90s on the M16 platform. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:24, 21 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Pics of the different M16s I mentioned above:<br />
[[File:Colt 601.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 601 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:Colt 602.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 602 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:USAF Colt Model 604.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 604 (USAF M16) - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:48, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Historical Question ==<br />
<br />
Anyone knows why XM177 never dropped the 'X' letter in it? If 'X' usually implies the prototype and testing stage, then why did XM177 have it with both upgrades and use in service, and the jamming M16s in Vietnam didn't? Or some other reasons? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:02, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Ignoring the USAF rifles (which got official GAU designations) the US Army only purchased a few thousand XM177s and the kinks were never really ironed out, so it is fair to call it an XM program still. Rifle was still in development stages really when US Army cut the funding due to Vietnam war involvement being scaled back.. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:27, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Were the Colt Commandos used in Somalia much more refined versions of XM177 program? If yes, I wonder why they were not put back in official service... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:19, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Do you have a pic of them, not sure what rifles you are talking about. If you are talking about the Model 733, that is not really related to the XM177s. US forces purchased a small number of Model 733s for Special Forces and was called the M16A2 commando, although Colt later offered it as the M4 Commando. Rangers and Delta in Somalia also used both Model 723s (A1 rear sight a straight barrel) and 727s (A2 rear sight with M4 profile barrel) and these weapons were known initially as M16A2 carbines, before morphing into the M4. Till the early 90s there were still some Model 653s (called the M16A1 carbine) and XM177s with the long moderators replaced with birdcages knocking around as well, so there were probably a lot of different guns knocking around Somalia. These guns were not refinements though, they were guns from the 60/70s that were still being used due to the fact that the US Army did not produce a standard issue carbine till the M4. I'm not even gonna mention the franken-guns that would have been used by the USAF special forces at the time. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:08, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, thanks, that explains it. [http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_123/449652_going_for_a_1993_Somalia_car15_build_and_need_your_help.html Here are the various photos]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:26, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Carbine/Model 653/Model 727/Model 733 ==<br />
<br />
Firstly, forgive my ignorance in things regarding the variety of AR-15 models. In the model description it says that it was 'never adopted formally by the US Military, and thus never had an "M" or "XM" designation.' However, in the following section where it lists the movies in which we can find this rifle it is often found as the M653. Can someone more knowledgeable either clear up why there is this discrepancy? Thanks --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 18:34, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Editors (and video game developers) often confuse the 'Model', 'M' and 'MK' designations. M653 should be changed to Model 653. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:14, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Correct. Model "___" is the official COLT designation and usually comes first. Only when the weapon is adopted as an official front line weapon does it get the "M" designation. And all these minutia of details in the weapons history STILL gives me a headache! ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:01, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::So does that mean we need to clean up this section to take all the 'M's away?--[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 08:11, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::I've replaced the "M"s with Models --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:22, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Model 978 ==<br />
<br />
'''I took this from Wikipedia, so it might be wrong.''' A lot of video games like to portray the M4A1 with additional burst mode. I read that the Colt Model 978 (a.k.a. "M4 Carbine Enhanced") is an M4 that features a S-1-3-F trigger group. I wonder how popular this variant was/is and most importantly when was it finalized and released? (if it was ever) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 14:15, 25 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:The four position fire selector weapons were adopted by nobody as far as I know, with the exception of Greece who bought the Model 778 (don't know how widespread this was, have just seen a few in some pics), which is basically a Model 727 with the four position selector. You can actually buy parts for a four position selectors, sears and disconnectors from Colt, so guns can be modified to this standard. However, I guarantee you that no guns in games actually have the correct four position selector, as it looks different to the standard one. Can't find any pics right now, but the four position selector is a flat plate with a ridge along the centre that ends in an odd knurled dome, sort of like a citrus juicer.<br />
<br />
:I have also heard of US Special Forces having the four posiiton M4A1s (Model 978), but may just be rumors, and if true there are very few of them and certainly not widespread. They could also be modifications to standard M4s. Below is a pic of the side of a Model 738 M4 Commando Enhanced (Model 733 with the four position selector) showing the selector switch design.<br />
<br />
:--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:37, 25 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:[[File:Colt Model 738.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 738 "M4 Commando Enhanced" fire selector.]]<br />
<br />
:Which games portray the M4A1 with additional burst mode, for example? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:40, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ghost Recon features the normal A1 and the "M4 SOCOM" which has the bonus burst mode. Same in The Sum of All Fears game (both Tom Clancy games). Cannot think of any other games right now. (Maybe I was a little exaggerating when I wrote "a lot of" since in most games you can't even toggle the rof.) So, according to what commando552 wrote, it is possible that the M4A1 with S-1-3-F group in Ghost Recon was intentional, since you control a (fictional) U.S. special force. (And the correct trigger groups: We (at least I) don't take the selectors into account, since in most games you cannot even see them, or are set to safe while the gun goes all rock&roll.)- [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:55, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Well, yeah, the universe of Tom Clancy is the one where the prototypes and ultra rare things come true, including weapons and vehicles, so the presence of AR-15-type firearm with four-position selector switch shouldn't come as surprise ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:48, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Bozitojugg3rn4ut, the selector really should be taken into account, as apart from the receiver markings the selector switch is the only external difference between the regular Colt carbines and the Enhanced version with burst and auto. If it has the regular fire selector and lacks the markings on the receiver, then it is simply and M4 with the wrong fire control group. Is very hard to tell from the Ghost Recon screen shots as there aren't any of the relevant side, but you can just make out that there are only 3 positions marked on the right side of the receiver, making the physical model that of a regular M4/M4A1 rather than an Enhanced M4. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:09, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Interestingly, this discussion is the first result when one Googles "Colt Model 978". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:05, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Main Page ==<br />
<br />
There are 2 issues:<br />
<br />
1) Shouldn't it be called AR-15, since ArmaLite AR-15 is the weapon that started it all?<br />
<br />
2) There is at least 1 not-rifle on the page: [[M16 rifle series#Colt 9mm Submachine Gun|Colt 9mm Submachine Gun]]<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:58, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree, AR-15 makes much more sense to me. I would call the page "AR-15 Variants", gets rid of the problem that "M16" is only relevant 5 or 6 of the 30 or so guns on the page, and the fact that rifle is not necessarily the correct term for all of them. I'm not sure how the site mechanics work, but would changing the name of the page create a massive problem for the 1000+ pages that link here, or would the redirects sort it all out? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:44, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Need to contact admins and ask them about this. I support your version, as more appropriate one. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:17, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Though you are technically correct, M16 is the most widely recognized nomenclature for the weapons that appear in films. Remember that we are not a gun encyclopedia, we are a weapons in MOVIE/TV/et al wiki. Sure, we utilized those rules of starting with the original weapon when it came to more obscure weapons (like grouping the R4s in with the Galils), but really famous weapons have their own pages, weapons that a firmly entrenched with their own identity in the mind of the movie going public. We also did not start a StG-44 page and then branch the AK-47s out from that even though the AKs obviously were a stepchild of the StG-44 Design theory. Very rarely are guns 'presented' as AR-15s in media. In fact many movie goers don't even recognize the term. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 18:13, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::I don't remember many movies where the character says: "Here is my M16!" or where the weapon is listed in closing credits :\<br />
::::The reason for AK-47 not being on the same page as StG-44 is having completely different design. AK-47 was ''inspired'' by StG project, nothing more. There are a lot of weapons that bear a ''resemblance'' to AK-47 or AR-15 but have different design and thus their own page. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:29, 31 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::'''P.S.''' Imagine IMFDB consisting of pages: ''"M1911"'', ''"Desert Eagle"'', ''"MP5"'', ''"Garand"'', ''"M14"'', ''"M16"'', ''"AK-47"'', ''"Everything Else"'' :D<br />
<br />
::::Now, [http://kingshamus.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/official.jpg THIS] made me laugh xD --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:34, 4 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== What is the point of the Colt 9mm SMG? ==<br />
<br />
Every time I look at it just seems so useless. I mean, why would anyone want what is essentially an M4 that does less damage with less range? Recoil would be lower I presume, but I cant see an M4 having a gigantic amount of recoil. I'm sure someone could help provide me with some insight but at the moment I'm finding it very hard pressed to find a purpose of this thing. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 14:20, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:I imagine it had more to do with some guys at Colt wanting to get in on the 9mm subgun market but not wanting to design an entire new platform to do it with. The 9mm round also gives you less penetration, which is good if, say, you're trying to shoot the guy you're aiming at only rather than him and the three things behind him. This is why the majority of people who actually use it are police or police-like units. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:42, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::The main advantage of it is that it is an SMG with the same ergonomics as an AR-15 platform, which makes training easier. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:27, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::9mm is much easier to suppress compared to 5.56. But Evil Tim's answer about Colt not wanting to design a whole new SMG is probably the right one.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 16:13, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M4 Scope optics ==<br />
<br />
Can someone give me some info on what is the standard scope optic for the military, and what is the best scope optic to use on the M4? i was just curious--Gunner5<br />
<br />
:Which military? The M4 is used by a number of them in some capacity. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:53, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
U.S. Military.--Gunner5<br />
<br />
:The most common, I would think, are the ACOG and Aimpoint RDS, but just about any optic can be used on it. As far as what's the best optic to use, "best" is a relative term and depends on the individual shooter and what he/she prefers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:01, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not to mention different optics are more effective in certain situations than others; most ACOGs typically use 4x magnification and are effective for engaging targets at a distance, while red dot sights don't use magnification and are more suited for close-range engagements. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 21:21, 12 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== USE WITH S.A.S ==<br />
<br />
Why does the S.A.S use the M16A2 as their standard rifle? In Bravo Two Zero (the book), Andy McNab calls the M16A2 a 4x4, and the SA80 a Rolls-Royce. Looking back, the S.A.S have a history of using foreign weapons. Why is this? Do Britain not make good enough weapons? Sure, the only thing we currently make and export are Accuraccy International's (which are the best sniper rifles in the world, and I don't care what anyone else says. It strikes me as strange, though, why the S.A.S use the AW50 and not the AS50 as their heavy-caliber sniper rifle), but why do the S.A.S have to use American weapons? Why not use German?<br />
<br />
:"...''have'' to use American weapons?" You have some kind of grudge against American weapons or something? :P In any case, the events of ''Bravo Two Zero'' took place during the first Gulf War, so I really doubt they're still using M16A2s in this age of optics and rail systems. It's my understanding that their ''current'' "standard" long gun is the C8FTHB carbine, which is essentially an M4A1 with a 16" barrel of different profile to that of a standard M4. As to why, well, they use what they ''want'' to use, whether it be British, American, German, whatever. Much like their American counterparts in CAG and DEVGRU, they have the leeway and budget to get a little bit of everything because their mission calls for it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 7 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The SAS adopted the M16 as a replacement for the 7.62 L1A1 SLR which was the standard British rifle at the time. The SLR was superior in terms of reliability, accuracy and range, but the M16 had a major weight advantage in terms of both the weapon and the ammunition, could mount a grenade launcher, and was capable of automatic fire (so was the SLR, but a match was required to be inserted into the action). One of the reasons they continued to use it after the introduction of the SA80 rifles was due to initial reliability problems, along with the fact that until relatively recently the SA80 culd not use an underbarrel grenade launcher (M16s were also used by other units, such as some Royal Marine units and the Pathfinders). Don't really know the exact reason why the SAS (along with Military Police and Royal Marine close protection along with a few others) use the C8SFW/CQB rather than the SA80 but would imagine it is partially due to the lower weight and the modularity of the SFW (bear in mind that the SA80 didn't have a railed forened until a few years ago and has only just gotten a MIL-STD-1913 on the top for different sights). Unlike the M16s adopted before, the C8 has actually been officially adopted by the MOD as the L119A1 (both the SFW and the CQB share the same designation though). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:17, 7 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::L119A1 is the official designation for C8 SFW in British SF service. C8 CQB is just its variant. An analogy would be M4A1 (official service) and Colt Commando (unofficial service). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:50, 8 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::::The Colt Commando moniker has never been attached to the M4, it's been primarily used to refer to previous A1-pattern carbines like the XM177 series. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:30, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::::Colt currently markets the Model 933 as the M4 Commando, and several models have the "M4 Commando" rollmarks on the left side of the lower receiver as well. It is a bit messed up though also being stamped as the "M16A2 Commando" (making no sense as it is a flattop), or simply "M4LE" on law enforcement Commandos. The Commandos in particular demonstrate the practice of cobbling guns together from whatever bits are available. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:44, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::Another reason the SAS don't use the SA80 is because you cannot use it in your left hand and they prefer to be able to use a weapon in both hands as it's better for shooting from behind cover. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 13:12, 12 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::"Why not use German?" Aside from the fact that if you say SAS most people with think of "Black Kit" with an MP5, there is still some rumours flying around about them using the 416 and 417. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 04:30, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Probably thrown around by HK's PR department, they sold a ton of MP5s off the back of the SAS using them to break up the Iranian Embassy Siege. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:20, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Using the HK416 might be BS, but British Special Forces do use the HK417. It was bought a few years ago as a DM rifle before the army got the L129A1. It was also more widely tested by the Royal Marines in the role, but was replaced when the L129A1 was adopted. [http://www.eliteukforces.info/images/gallery/uksf/sfsg-multicam-hr.jpg Here] is a photo of an SFSG team, the guy second from the left in the first row has a suppressed HK417. They guy behing may also have one, but can only make out the stock so could be another AR-15 pattern rifle. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:51, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::::::He's got a Minimi Para with a PIP stock like the guy second from the right in the front row; you can see the iron sight against his shirt. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 11:50, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Page Title ==<br />
<br />
While this page contains many weapons based on the AR-15, shouldn't it be called "AR-15 family of weapons" or something like than rather that just "M16 rifle series"? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 12:36, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:Look 4 topics above this one. If it was up to me I would call it "AR-15 rifle series" or something like that, but MPM2008 made the point that although this would be technically correct the average person coming to site would be much more familiar with the term M16, which is fair enough. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:53, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sniper Rifles? ==<br />
<br />
How are we defining "Sniper Rifles" for [[:Category:Sniper Rifle]]. It seems to me that all the guns on this page are Assault Rifles. I know that you can certainly convert an M16 to a sniper rifle but all the images seem to be of Assault rifles. Just curious! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:47, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:The main rifle on here that I would class as a sniper rifle is the Mk 12 SPR but there are also the Vietnam-era M16 sniper variants, the Model 655 and 656. There are also some "target" AR-15s like the Colt Accurized Rifle and the Match Target Competitions that I would probably class as sniper rifles if I had to put them into a category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 20:21, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Sadly, it seems that Colt has discontinued the Colt Accurized Rifle for the time being. I checked my old link on the [[SWAT 4]] page and it no longer works, nor is the Colt Accurized Rifle anywhere to be found on their product page sections of their website (maybe it just couldn't compete with similar products from other companies?). I was hoping the Colt Accurized Rifle would have been included on this page--I guess that won't be the case now, for how can a firearm be included here on this wiki if it failed to make much of an impact (to the point that it was discontinued) and thus won't be in many pieces of audio-visual media? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 21:57, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::I missed the Mk 12 SPR. I 100% agree with you on that one, that is DEFINATELY a sniper. Thanks for clarifying! Any change we could could put a definition on the [[:Category:Sniper Rifle]] page like the one that is on the [[:Category:Assault Rifle]] page? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:28, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::The 655 and 656 were full-auto capable, so I wouldn't exactly lump them in as sniper rifles. Same goes for the Mark 12, if you want to get technical. The Mark 12 grew out of a program to create a SOPMOD upper receiver component that the shooter could switch out with his M4 upper when in need of increased range and accuracy. So in its original form, the SPR was still technically an assault rifle (and as such it's still frequently used in that manner by SOF who switch out uppers on full-auto lowers), it just had a high-magnification scope, and we all know that just sticking a scope on an AR doesn't make it a sniper rifle. It didn't lose its full auto capability until it was type-classified as an individual weapon. Mark 12s in regular grunts' hands would likely be dedicated sniper rifles, but those you see in use by SOF are more than likely just SPR uppers on M4 lowers. There's a similar distinction between Mark 18s (complete type-classified weapon with 10.5" uppers on refurbished M16A1 lowers) and "M4A1 CQBRs" (10.3" uppers on M4 lowers). [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:55, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Just because something has full automatic capability doesn't mean it is not a sniper rifle. It is unusual and arguably unnecessary, but as far as I know there is no official definition of what a sniper rifle does and does not have. In my opinion it is a sniper rifle if it is designed for and used in the sniping role. Hell, you can even call small caliber stuff like the Ruger 10/22 a sniper rifle as it has been used as one. For the purposes of this site though, I think the category should be used if the rifle ''appears'' to be a sniper rifle to the average user who might be trying to identify something. In other words, a catch all term for sniper, designated marksman, target and hunting rifles. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 21:14, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:I was under the impression that a dedicated sniper rifle had to have (at a minimum) a scope, be chambered in a full-size rifle round (so as to allow for accurate distant shots with high stopping power, a key part of sniping), be ergonomically suited for use while prone (i.e., its magazine must not be so large as to create an obstruction when lying on the ground on your stomach, and preferably have a bipod) and allow for accurate semi-automatic/bolt-action fire (fully-automatic or burst-fire is possible but counter-productive for accurate long-range shots, and such capability is usually reserved for Designated Marksmen who must travel with a squad and still keep some close-quarters firepower if necessary). So something like the VSS Vintorez wouldn't count because its round is short-ranged (up to 400 meters only given its subsonic velocity, so it's more of an accurized "special purpose" assault rifle), while the SVD would, due to its scope, 7.62x54mmR caliber, small magazine size to ensure it doesn't get in the way when used while prone (I'm very confused as to why the Soviets never put a bipod on the SVD, however), and semiautomatic-only nature. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 21:57, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::As we only have the sniper rifle category here, I would class the VSS Vintorez as such, as it is designed as a suppressed sniper rifle. By virtue of the fact that it is suppressed it uses a lower power shorter range cartridge than a typical sniper rifle, but not all sniping is long range. If you were to use an integrally suppressed [[Accuracy_International_Arctic_Warfare_series#Accuracy_International_Arctic_Warfare_Suppressed|AWS]] with subsonic ammunition the range would be limited like on the Vintorez, but that doesn't mean it is no longer a sniper rifle. In particular, for police and some special forces uses long range is not as important in a sniper rifle as accuracy and other considerations. Like I said before, silenced Ruger 10/22s have been used by special forces for almost silent sniping. Another example would be the Russian SV-99, which is a silent sniper rifle based on a .22LR biathlon rifle. Weapons like these are specialized sniper rifles, but they are still sniper rifles none the less. I'm not sure whether trying to make a fixed definition for a sniper rifle is a good idea, as you will always find exceptions. Not all "sniper rifles" even use telescopic sights, an example being the Barrett M82A2 which uses a 1x red dot sight as it was actually designed for shooting from the shoulder as a low cost anti helicopter weapon. Another rifle that breaks your definition would be the [[BMS Milcam Rifle Series|BMS Snicam]] which is undeniably a sniper rifle, but uses a 5.56mm cartridge from 20/30 round STANAG magazine. Different sniper rifles have wildly different characteristics depending on the specific task they are designed for. The only thing I can say about what should be in the sniper rifle category is if it looks like one, put it in there. This isn't an encyclopaedia, the idea of the categories is to help people identify unknown guns, so if it looks like a sniper rifle that is the category they will be looking in. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:13, 19 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About charging handle ==<br />
<br />
From [http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/11/foghorn/ask-foghorn-what-does-a-forward-assist-do/ The Truth About Guns]:<br />
<br />
''"Ever since, part of the military’s manual of arms for loading the M16 and its variants includes a mandatory smacking of the charging handle even if it isn’t necessary."''<br />
<br />
Is it about racking the charging handle? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:51, 28 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That is a mistake, smacking the charging handle does nothing on an AR-15. As it had previously been talking about the introduction of the forward assist (the button on the right rear of the upper receiver), I assume it is meant to say ''"Ever since, part of the military’s manual of arms for loading the M16 and its variants includes a mandatory smacking of the '''forward assist''' even if it isn’t necessary."'' --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:01, 28 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ah, thanks for the explanation. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:50, 28 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:M16_rifle_series&diff=538954Talk:M16 rifle series2012-03-28T06:51:27Z<p>Masterius: /* About charging handle */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>==Screen Used Rifles==<br />
[[Image:M16A1M203ScarfaceCombo.jpg |thumb|none|600px|World IMFDB Exclusive: Screen used Faux M203 Launcher with M16A1 with Quadrant and Front ladder sight - 5.56x45mm. This is verified screen used from the film ''[[Scarface]]''. Two 30 round magazines have been taped together with black gaffer's tape to emulate the way Tony Montana loaded his weapon in the film. What is interesting is that the tape in the movie does really appear to be motion picture gaffer's tape, which would only be common on ... a movie set.]]<br />
[[Image:M4_SWAT-1-.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M4A1 with ACOG scope and Surefire M500AB weaponlight. This is one of the screen-used weapons seen in ''[[S.W.A.T. (film)|S.W.A.T.]]'' - 5.56x45mm.]]<br />
[[Image:UVARCarbine.jpg|thumb|600px|none|CAR-15 like the one used in ''[[Uncommon Valor]]'' - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:BattleLA M16A4.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M16A4 (5.56x45mm) with ACOG scope, RIS foregrip, Magpul MBUS rear sight, and AN/PEQ-15 IR designator as seen in ''[[Battle: Los Angeles]]'']]<br />
[[Image:Colt Law Enforcement Model 6920 Carbine..jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Law Enforcement Carbine with ACOG scope and PentagonLight MD3R weaponlight, screen-used weapon from ''[[I Am Legend]]'' - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
<br />
==Additional Variants==<br />
[[Image:CustomNorthHollywoodAR15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Custom AR-15/M16 Hybrid gun (5.56x45mm) made to resemble the firearm used by Emil Matasareanu in the 1997 North Hollywood Bank Of America Shootout, represented in the film ''[[44_Minutes:_The_North_Hollywood_Shootout|44 Minutes:The North Hollywood Shootout.]]'']]<br />
[[Image:OlympicArmsAR15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|An Olympic Arms AR15 (note: Olympic arms did not renamed their rifles with the "K" designation until after the 1990s) with A2 Handguards and the Olympic Arms stowaway pistol grip - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M203xm177.jpg|thumb|none|600px|XM177 - 5.56x45mm with M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:model 656.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M16A1 with 20-round magazine, fitted with scope - 5.56x45mm]] <br />
[[Image:M4 m203 old.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 727 - 5.56x45mm with [[M203 grenade launcher]] - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:607-2-sm-741x267.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 607 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:Mockcommando.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt XM177E2 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:GUU-5P.jpg|thumb|none|600px|GUU-5/P - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M148.jpg|thumb|none|600px|XM177E2 - 5.56x45mm with a mounted [[XM148 grenade launcher]] - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:K3B.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Olympic Arms K3B carbine - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:101-rifle-c8fthb-carbine-6.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Canada C8A3 Carbine with EOTech red dot sight - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M16A4M203ACOG.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Artwork of an M16A4 rifle - 5.56x45mm with ACOG scope and M203 grenade launcher - 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:M653M203.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Model 653 5.56x45mm with magazine removed and M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
[[Image:Cam15a4tacticalcarbine.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Classic Army M15A4 airsoft carbine rifle - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:RRA DEA.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Rock River Arms Tactical CAR-A4 Carbine 5.56mm with EOTech sight]]<br />
[[File:Model 633 SMG DOE.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt 9mm SMG DOE (Model 633), shortened variant of the Model 635 produced for the Department Of Energy - 9x19mm]]<br />
<br />
==Airsoft Replicas==<br />
[[Image:CAXM177.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A Classic Army XM177 airsoft replica rifle - 5.56x45mm (of the type used by SF troops in some scenes of the movie ''[[Green Zone]]'').]]<br />
[[Image:XM177_shorty.jpg|thumb|none|600px|CAR-15 SMG AIRSOFT RIFLE - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:Icsm4ris2006.jpg|thumb|none|600px|M4A1 AIRSOFT RIFLE with a RIS foregrip and AN/PEQ-2 IR designator - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:Colt AR15 Match Target Competition HBAR II 6731.jpg|thumb|600px|none|Colt AR15 Match Target HBAR II (Model MT6731) - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
This is the marushin cap gun?--[[User:Kin93|Kin93]] 07:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
::Yes, you are right, it is, so this is one of the FIRST guns I need to photograph (a real one) and replace this Airsoft abomination. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
Actually thats a ICS airsoft M4 with the grip and laser box....<br />
<br />
An airsoft gun and a cap gun aren't the same thing. LOL [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:43, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Interesting ==<br />
...I seriously doubt anyone will ever see an underslung version of the M203 used in a film, all by itself, ...<br />
<br />
but there have been stand alone M203 launchers (modified with a pistol grip and stock like the M79LF 37mm launchers) as well as the M203 being attached to guns other than the M16 (take Rambo III for example where they attached it to an AK). Having a section on the M16 w M203 on the M16 page makes sense since that is where people will look if they're curious about that particular combo appearing in a movie. But I like having a separate page for the M203 to address more detailed history of the launcher plus any applications where the launcher is used with other weapons. Just a thought...<br />
::We do need a page where M203s are used as stand alone launchers, rare, but it has happened. But we should shift all M203s underslung to M16s to the M16 Page and have a note directing users to that page when looking for that combination on the M203 page. Just IMHO.... [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Makes sense, that configuration. Also, there was a standalone M203 on Bones, and there might be others (sometime WAY in the future, when a director wants to use a "modern" version of an M79, like how James Cameron used the fictional roto-craft in place of the Huey).<br />
<br />
== Do well really need to have an "A2" and "A3" category?==<br />
<br />
[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] has already explained that just about all of the "M16A2s" used in movies are actually A2 uppers on A1 lowers, often with A1 flash hiders. By this definition, none of them are true "M16A2s", and might actually be considered M16A3s roughly. But since they're usually seen impersonating M16A2s, I say designate by receiver style only (both the A2 and A3 have what is usually called the "A2 receiver").<br />
<br />
In other words, I think we should ditch the M16A3 category completely. It makes no sense to distinguish between A2s and A3s when basically all of the "Hollywood" A2s and A3s are the same type of gun. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 20:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I never got anyone's feedback on this, but...I decided to go ahead and ditch the M16A3 entry, for the reasons I explained above. It doesn't make sense to try and distinguish between "A2s" and "A3s" in movies when MoviePropMaster has explained that they're all basically the same thing - A2-style uppers on fully automatic A1 lowers. By that definition, none of them are true "M16A2s", but since they're obviously supposed to portray such rifles in movies, it makes more sense to call them A2s. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I agree, because the M16A3 was made for Navy SEALs and SeeBees, no civilian hands hae touched them. -Winchester (1-26-09)<br />
I believe the 1995 remake of Village of the Damned portrayed the National Guard using burst fire. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 03:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
(the above was in reply to a comment that the author deleted as i posted.) --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 03:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Also I think Colt sold A3s to foreign entities, National police of allied countries, Elite units, etc. Any country with which we are friendly and Colt has sold weapons in the past. I've heard that A3s were sold as samples to France, U.K. and Germany (but that was a casual comment that I heard years ago). There 'could' be A3s in the armories of foreign movie productions. That is a completely grey area with which I have no one to verify anything. :( [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 05:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:This is strange. I posted a comment here a couple hours ago, asking how many movies are there were burst fire is portrayed? I know Black Hawk Down has one instant. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
::I've seen some films that had three round burst fire. I will try to get the titles and list them [[Special:Contributions/205.172.16.102|205.172.16.102]] 01:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
There is a significant difference between a true A2 and A3 M16. Externally, they look identical, however the A3 is full auto and the A2 is 3 shot burst. Simply put: A1 and A3 are full auto, A2 and A4 are 3 shot burst. The external differences are what make it a little easier to identify. We all know what an A1, A2, and A4 M16 look like, but the A3 is just an A2 that is full auto. Hope this helps; Its my first time posting. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 10:14, 29 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== The caption to the M16A1 w/ M16A2 handguards... ==<br />
I was in the National Guard in the early '90's and that's exactly what we had. I was also issued an M16A1 with A2 handguards in basic training. It turns out that it's simpler and--from what I heard--cheaper to replace the 'A1 guards with 'A2 guards because the 'A2's are less complex and you only need to stock one type instead of 'lefts' and 'rights'. Also, the 'A1'a in the national guard were freshly rebuilt, tested, and had the serial numbers laser etched into the bolt carriers. They were issued with all 'A2 furniture.<br />
<br />
:Yeah, I've seen plenty of A1s with A2 hand guards elsewhere. In fact, if you ever watch footage of the current offensive into Gaza, you can see both IDF personnel and Hamas militants using them. The Israelis received a lot of M16A1s and have updated many of them with the M16A2 hand guards. Many of these rifles were passed into Israeli's "allies" in Fatah, and then Hamas stole plenty of them during their war with Fatah (some were also probably stolen from the IDF themselves). -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 22:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
just for the record here is an M16A1 with A2 handguards in service <br />
[[Image:RP Marines assault line DM-SD-06-10463.JPEG|thumb|none|600px|RP Marines armed with M16A1s with A2 handguards.]] <br />
--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 22:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Mark 12 Special Purpose Rifle ==<br />
<br />
Does anyone have an image of one?<br />
-[[User:AdAstra2009]]<br />
<br />
:I put one on the ''[[Live Free or Die Hard]]'' page that I took from another site. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks I pasted it from that page but we should probably look into getting a noncopyrighted one.<br />
-[[User:AdAstra2009]]<br />
<br />
::Well, you can ask MoviePropMaster2008 if he has a Mark 12 upper in his company's inventory. I imagine he also knows armorers at Cinema Weaponry (the guys who supplied the weapons for ''[[Live Free or Die Hard]]''), so he might even be able to get us one of the same guns used in that movie. But he's very busy of course and has LOTS of other image requests to tend to, so it might be a while before he gets around to it. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
== Rate of Fire on the M16A1 ==<br />
Does anyone know the rate of fire on the M16A1?[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 22:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I assume it's about 800 rounds a minute [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 08:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:That would be correct, it's around 750 to 800 RPM. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== What is this? ==<br />
It's not really from a movie, but a music video, and I havn't been able to figure out what this AR is yet, there are two others in the video, one's an M16A1, the other an A2, but I just can't figure this one out.<br />
<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle1.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle2.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle3.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle4.JPG<br />
http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/Image:RA_Rifle5.JPG<br />
<br />
Looks like an M733, what is this from? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 08:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
:The gun in the first 'cap looks different from the CAR-15s in the other pictures. Maybe it's a fake XM177?-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 12:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
::It's from the music video for Hero Of War by Rise Against, the main soldier uses it, his two buddies use an M16A1 and M16A2, I'm almost 100% sure there are only three rifles in the video. Yeah, I'm thinking M733 too... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]]<br />
<br />
==XM607 Commando Carbine==<br />
I do remember the weapon from ''[[Pink Cadillac]]'' an XM607, or an AR-15 modified to imitate one. The weapon may not have been officially adopted but kits were released to the public though:<br />
<br />
* [http://totalsilenceinc.com/XM607_pages/questions.html 1]<br />
* [http://www.retroblackrifle.com/ModGde/CrbGde/607.html 2]<br />
* [http://www.fototime.com/A2FFCE89093C8E7/standard.jpg 3]<br />
<br />
[[User:Cutaway|Cutaway]] 18:54PM, 3/7/2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I changed the entry after I watched the trailer for the movie. The trailer is on YouTube, and the gun in question is visible at the 00:27-00:28 mark:<br />
<br />
:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LddykTA8nVg<br />
<br />
:That is definitely an older-model LaFrance Specialties M16K. It doesn't have the triangular front sight post of the XM607. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 18:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==The Photoshopped M16 images==<br />
<br />
Can people '''please''' stop posting the images of M16 variants that were edited using MPM's photos? There's a reason I've removed them before. We don't need to have every variant on the page, and many of them are inaccurate, anyway. The only one we allow is the XM16E1, because we don't have a good photo of one of those yet, and even that may get replaced. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
*The Colt 607 image I posted wasn't one of MPM's [unless someone stole it and re-hosted it], I got it from google. Only put it here because the page for the The World Is Not Enough videogame didn't have a 607 image. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 05:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why do we have Colt Model 727 by itself==<br />
When the Model 727 is just the commercial Colt name for the M4 carbine? it doesn't make sense to have the exact GUN made by Colt with it's commercial name (for law enforcement sales or international sales) with a separate category, when it should just be merged in with the M4/M4A1 category. The M16 page is getting out of control. MPM2008<br />
<br />
:I agree that the Model 727 should be merged with the M4 category, but it's not exactly a commercial name for an M4. The Model 777 is the commercial name for the very first M4 (the one that didn't have the detachable carry handle). The 727 and 777 are identical, but the 727 is safe-semi-auto and the 777 is safe-semi-burst. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
:::Good point. But in the overall view, I think all that info (a) should be in the M4 category, (b) should be a footnote, NOT a separate category and (c) people are endlessly creating separate categories for weapons that are essentially the same guns as other categories. Experienced IMFDB users/Mods already know that most of the M16 variants seen in films are build ups of other guns. We usually just get the accessories and barreled uppers and put them on our full auto or semi auto lowers. Why spend thousands to get new guns when we're sitting on dozens and dozens of other M16s? Also, in VideoGames and Anime, again, they don't have to specify the new or commercial model unless it's specifically stated or named explicitly. Even then it can be a footnote in the original category. <br />
<br />
==Adding images==<br />
<br />
I'm getting a little annoyed with people adding images we don't need on the page, including many that are crap and which aren't necessary. Not to mention that half of them aren't even using the "<nowiki>br clear=all</nowiki>" command to ensure that the images won't drift into the next gun entry. So, I'm putting a stop to this now. No more without talking about it here first. Next person who doesn't respect my wishes gets a 1-week time out. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 17:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:They're still doing it. I have removed the custom A1 upper mounted on an SP1 lower with A2 handguards from this page several times. It is not a common real like frankengun (but it has happened). I originally built this and photographed it for the HEAT page until better screenshots proved that Wes Studi's AR15 was an A1 style lower, not an SP1. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I couldn't agree more, for some reason, these users seem to think that every single picture of a gun needs to be on it's page. It especially frustrates me when they're sticking all customized guns that only appear in one movie onto a page, they may look cool, but they're not even standard configurations! All they end up doing is turning the gun page into a cluttered, sloppy mess of pictures, I mean just look at the [[Remington 870]] and [[Mossberg 500]] pages.--[[User:Alienqueen11|Alienqueen11]] 22:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Would it be alright if I added the following image to the [[M16 rifle series#M4/M4A1 with M203 Grenade Launcher|M4/M4A1 with M203 Grenade Launcher]] section?<br />
<br />
[[Image:Sopmod m4 m203 06.jpg|thumb|none|350px|M4A1 5.56x45mm with M68 Aimpoint red dot scope, flip-up rear sight, and M203 grenade launcher 40mm]]<br />
<br />
Figured that since the other sections on the page have pics of the 'basic' and 'tricked-out' versions, why not this one? [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 21:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Does anyone have any pictures of a heavily modified M4 style platform? ex- The Unit, BlackHawk Down, Tears of the Sun? [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 17:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
So why not update this page to include current issue M16A4 rifles?<br />
(unless you don't know what they are....)<br />
<br />
==A Warm Thank-You==<br />
For years I have been trying to find out what the guns were Peter & Roger used in Dawn of the Dead. This site solved what the problem so many other "gun experts" on IMDb could not. Again, thank you.<br />
:Thats what IMFDB is for =) --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 18:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Let's See If You Can Figure This Out==<br />
I couldn't find a real picture so I put this together. Its an M4A1 with the old style stock, and a straight (no cuts) 16" barrel; or its a Sporter (or one of those older three number ones like that) with a removable carry handle; take your pick. I was just wondering what it actually is...<br />
<br />
P.S. Every detail is intentional and exactly how its supposed to be even though its not a real picture, just so everyone knows that. ;)<br />
[[Image:M4A1COD4.jpg]]<br />
<br />
:It would be a hybrid commercial AR variant. It has an M16A1 style lower receiver, so it is NOT a Sporter I or II. Basically, it's an M4 Carbine with a flat top and detachable carry handle, with an old style buttstock and a civilian HBAR Carbine barrel outfitted with RIS forearms. Various manufacturers made similar guns to this design, like Bushmaster and a few others. Also many builders of AR15s made similar guns from parts kits from M&A, Patriot Arms, (the now defunct Nesard), Sun Valley, and others. With the advent of custom builds from aftermarket parts from dozens of manufacturers, the AR15 has become the ultimate "mutt". I can tell you this is NOT an issued military variant, so it would NOT have an "M" designation unless it was built from an M4 to begin with. Also nearly everyone uses the step down M4 style barrels for carbines, unless it's the ultra light. The HBAR Carbine style barrels are becoming rarer by the day since their heyday was the 1990s. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Thanks a lot, very informative answer. This is the "M4 Carbine" in Call Of Duty 4, and I've been trying to figure out exactly what it really is for a while. I didnt say where it was from because I figured the answer I'd get would be something like "its a videogame, so its probably not a real model", but I knew that ;) I like the look and have been trying to make it as an airsoft project, this helps a lot... too bad airsoft HBAR barrels are very hard to come by. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::How did you make that? At first I thought it was Pimp My Gun, but PMG doesn't have an M16A1 pistol grip yet. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::No, you thought right my friend, it is Pimp My Gun, I just used MS Paint to remove the little finger nub and made the HBAR barrel by copying and pasting the largest part of the barrel over the rest of it. That's all the "photoshopping" that I did. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:45, 13 <br />
February 2010 (UTC)<br />
::If it's from CoD4, then blame lack of details on modelers that made that gun model. They simply saved some poligons for improved performance of the game. Same thing with lack of gas-block when front sight is removed. It supposed to be M4A1 and i'm 100% sure they had pictures of military issued M4A1's as a reference.<br />
:::I'm sure they wanted it to be an M4A1, but I've seen a lot of movies where HK94s were converted to be MP5s, or 92FSs were converted to be 93Rs and last I checked on this site we identify guns on what they are, not what they're supposed to be... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 00:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== M16A1 series' portray ==<br />
<br />
In the present, does anyone think that like the Ak47 and its variants, the M16A1 series is sometimes stereotypically portrayed as a bad guy's gun?<br />
I've seen the IRA, FARC guerillas, Mexican drug lords and some gangbangers use them.<br />
Overall is this true?<br />
:In the real world, the USSR dumped millions of AKs into the hands of satellite states and insurgents around the world. In the Vietnam and immediate post Vietnam years the U.S. dumped millions of M16A1s to our allies. With the fall of Vietnam, all of the South Vietnamese M16A1s ended up in the hands of communist guerillas (as well as the AK). The AK and the M16 were the most prolifically distributed weapons of the last 50 years. There is no conspiracy to make them 'look bad'. They're in the hands of everyone so it is invevitable.<br />
:Even Iran uses a variant of the M16A1, a copy of the Norinco CQ called the ''S-5.56'', as their standard rifle. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== AR Series firing 5.7 Ammo??? ==<br />
<br />
I was in a gun shop in Michigan today and saw a weapon with an AR-15 type body but with the mag of a P-90 running along the rail. I asked the guy at the shop and he did confirm the weapon did fire the 5.7 round. Anyone have any idea who makes the weapon and what it may be called? Incidentally the store was The Firing Line in Westland Michigan. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 03:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
::They sell those uppers here in California all the time. My local gun store has 5.7mm firing AR15 uppers that take the P90 magazine. But I never bothered to check who made it, that's what GOOGLE is for. I just never had an interest [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I have seen examples of this conversion as well. It is actually a specially-made upper receiver that can be mounted onto pretty much any AR-15 style lower receiver. The magazine mounts along the top of the weapon as with the P90, and the original magazine well in the lower receiver becomes the ejection port with the spent brass falling down through there instead of being spit out to the side. As for the manufacturer, I can't quite recall who makes it, but it is definitely quite an interesting piece of hardware. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 07:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
As long as my memory goes, is called the AR-57 and is manufactured by 57Center, or something like that --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I remember when Impact Guns got those in. You can buy them here: http://www.impactguns.com/store/AR-57%20UR.html<br />
<br />
::The manufacturer's web site, as Yocapo32 pointed out, is 57 Center. Their web site is here: http://www.57center.com/<br />
<br />
::What's interesting is that the AR magazine well is where the brass gets ejected. The only problem I can see with having a P90 magazine mounted on top is that it leaves limited rail space on top for mounting accessories. You could have a scope or iron sights, and not much else. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 15:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the info guys, again, I know this was not germane to the topic, it was just a little odd to see something like that as I had never heard of it before. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 16:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Stolen M4A1s==<br />
<br />
In real life is there ever any incidents where police have seized M4A1 carbines from criminials or terrorists during raids?<br />
<br />
:Do you mean mil-spec M4s, as opposed to semi-auto AR-15 carbines that are patterned after the M4? I would doubt it. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 21:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Never, or else it has never been reported anywhere, ever. And I am talking about real select fire 14.5" barreled M4/M4A1 carbines. However, California has had a rash of MP5s and MP5Ks stolen out of police cars, which were left unlocked when the cops were in a strip club. Seriously. they have not shown up since....[[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 06:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Suitable combat weapon==<br />
<br />
Which weapon is considered better for infantry? An M16A1/M203 combo or an OICW?<br />
:M16A1/M203. The XM29 weighs damn near 20 lbs., compared to 8 or 9 lbs. for the M16 when fitted with a 203. Fire control system or not, the last thing I'd want to be stuck with on a 60 mile march is an F-ing 20 lbs. rifle. And sign your posts by typing four '''~''' after them. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 23:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The M16/M203 combo is definitely superior; it has been proven in real-world combat situations over the last 30-plus years, whereas the only live-fire situation the XM29 has seen at the most is at the Aberdeen testing ranges. The closest replacement the M16/M203 will likely see anytime soon is an [[FN SCAR]]/[[Heckler & Koch M320|M320]], and even then the SCAR is only in limited use with the 75th Ranger Regiment at present. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 05:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The real question is whether or not the XM8 Carbine is better than the M4A1/derivatives (H&K 416, REC7, etc). And we probably won't ever know. <br />
<br />
Also, the OICW was more of a man-portable version of a Doom gun than anything that you would actually bother carrying on duty. 20mm airburst auto-loader, saboted sub-5.56mm rounds? What could you use that for other than trying to clear a drug cartel's fortified mansion by yourself?<br />
<br />
[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]<br />
<br />
:One of the many things that led to the death of the XM29 was its sheer size. The Army wanted it scaled down to the size of an M4 [http://www.ghostrecon.net/images_arms/xm29_1.jpg] and 14 lbs max (which an M4 with all its mods gets pretty close to), but with today's technology, it just wasn't possible. Maybe in 20 years or so it will be, but the XM29 is presently dead for the foreseeable future. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Installation of a front Flip up/down Iron sights. ==<br />
<br />
I was watching The Losers, and while I agree that those 4 characters all had M4A1s, they seemed to switch between fixed front sight and flip up/down iron sights. I was wondering how hard it would be to take an M4A1, remove the front factory sight and replace it with a flip up/down sight. I know it's pretty easy for the rear sight, but I wasn't sure about the front sight. (OK, I also want to ask this question because I, like many people, have played Modern Warfare 2 and seen the M4 with a flip up/down front sight.) --[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
:Not really that difficult. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 04:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
:I believe the process would involve removing the muzzle brake and the existing front sight/gas block assembly and replacing it with a gas block that has either a rail to mount your choice of front sight, or a folding front sight, then reinstalling the muzzle brake. You can find instructional videos for this process at various gunsmithing websites. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 14:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Forward Assist ==<br />
Does anyone know when reloading if it is a good idea to hit the forward assist after hitting the bolt release or its ok just to start firing after hitting the bolt release?<br />
<br />
:The idea behind hitting the forward assist after reloading is to ensure the bolt is fully seated and that the weapon is ready to fire. It's generally not really nessicary at the range, but when in a combat situation where you might have dirt or whatnot fouling the chamber, it's a good idea to do that to ensure that the weapon will fire when you need it to.[[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 23:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:The M16 series are the ONLY assault rifles (except the [http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83:g41-series&catid=8:the-automatic-rifles&Itemid=5/ HK G41], which is made to be like the M16 and is no longer produced) in the world to have a forward assist. Why don't other assault rifles have a forward assist? (ie. the AK-74, G36 etc.) Because other assault rifles are more reliable and don't need it. :)<br />
::Uh more associated with the design of the Bolt than being more reliable. The AK series have a bolt handle attached DIRECTLY to the bolt carrier as do many other designs. If there is debris or fouling in the chamber which keeps a round from seating properly you can just jam the handle forward (I've done this in the field when my AK / Garand / Galil / M 14 / etc jammed) I once had a tiny piece of bark (I was firing under trees) which fell from above and fell into the ejection port and made the round 'stick' really badly in the chamber so that it would not seat properly. The M16 design has no way other than the forward assist to nudge the bolt & carrier forward enough to fire and kick that crap free of the action. But I wouldn't bash the M16 as an "unreliable" rifle. I'd sure take it into battle right now. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 20:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
:::Alright, I understand. thanks for the extra info. I'm not saying the M16/M4 is a complete piece of crap, but it's definitely not the BEST ASSAULT RIFLE IN THE WORLD! like we Americans like to state all the time (*rolls eyes*). You and me both know the M16/M4 is no where as reliable as the G36 or the AK series. But at least it's better than the L85 series, now that's a piece crap rifle. :D *Edit: Well at least the L85A1, the L85A2 is OK. kinda like the M16/M16A1s sucks but the M16A2/A4s are good.<br />
<br />
::::I have to completely disagree with what you say, i don't wish to come off as passive aggresive but you sound like a mall ninja that learned their weapons knowledge from seeing them perform in videogames or hearing public opinions on weapons from the news or other sources. The M16 family of rifles are both fine and fairly reliable weapons, while much of that view has been skewed by the fact they were portrayed as unreliable during conflicts such as Vietnam, is incorrect to a degree. The M16 is a reliable and capable weapon when cleaned and properly maintained, it simply lacks the ability to stay so when not properly serviced, as some other rifles such as the AKM can function fine without cleaning, the M16 can not. As for your comment on the L85 series, yes they were somewhat poor and unreliable weapons at first, coupled with poor grips and clumsy to handle for certain users, however the newer models have made large improvements and are very capable firearms. As i feel it needs to be said (or typed) a common mistake people make is assuming that militaries have access and funding to field their troops with the best weapons available, which is not always the case as most countries don't have the money to field an Army with rifles that can cost up to $5000-10000 per unit. Which is where the workhorses like M16's come in, you go for the "good" rifle not the "great" one. Also, although off-topic it somewhat pertains to the M16, most mall ninja's assume the AK-family is better because it is more reliable and fires a heavier cartridge, I've always asked "would you want a round that's going to pierce right through an enemy and leave an easy to treat wound, or have a round that hits an enemy and fragments inside them causing an ungodly bloody mess?" Hopefully esteemed imfdb members such as MPM2008 will agree with and share my viewpoint concerning this subject, as well as not condemn me for my long comment. [[User:Doc345|Doc345]] 13:24, 06 March 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::The issues of jamming during the Vietnam War had more to do with ammunition and the lack of a chrome-lined chamber and barrel than the rifle's so-called "dirty" gas system. In 1964 the Army switched from stick powder to ball powder, which increased the rate of fire to over 1,000 RPM and left a lot of dirty residue in the weapon. This was only exacerbated by the lack of cleaning kits and training on how to maintain the weapon. They fixed the issue by fitting the rifle with a buffer system (which slowed the ROF down) and chrome-plated chamber. Training programs in weapon maintenance were instituted and an instruction book on how to maintain the rifle was circulated among troops. After further modifications resulted in the M16A1, many of the reliability issues disappeared (although even today, the weapon has yet to shed its bad reputation). The M16A2, A3, A4, and M4 carbine of today are an entirely different breed of warrior than the prototypes that were issued back in the 60s. While it may admittedly be a bit finicky, the M16 today is a good weapon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:29, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Yeah but it's still a very fussy weapon, it's not very durable, and it has much more malfunctions/jams then say the H&K G36, but none the less it's still a excellent weapons platform, mostly. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I was always taught that the forward assist, while useful in combat, in situations where dirt or grime can jam a weapon, overall, if you DO need to use it, its a good indication of a malfunction and should be addressed, especially if its at a range. Theres a video somewhere on youtube, of a guy shooting some sort of AR, and repeatedly hits the forward assist, without clearing or checking the bore, until the entire gun explodes, probably from a round hitting one stuck in the bore. -MissySummers- 18:47, 8 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== The comment about the SPR Mk 12 shooting full auto... ==<br />
<br />
The design--at least the original ones--used a match grade trigger group that actually fired full auto.<br />
<br />
If my Web Fu is correct, NSN 1005-01-562-0901 from Knight's Armament. <br />
<br />
The original, intended purpose was to allow the uppers to be swapped out for a short barreled model initially so a marksman could use a short range weapon on the way in and out and the more accurate upper at the objective.<br />
<br />
Sources: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=003aa7475e95c9b56d5814227cc5d4ec&tab=core&_cview=0<br />
<br />
::https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fbd46923c9e6d18cd916b8a6e7d3cfdf&tab=core&_cview=0 <br />
<br />
States the Special Purpose Receiver (Early designs) specifies:<br />
<br />
"(C) OTHER PERFORMANCE GOALS: (1) Increased reliability, durability, corrosion resistance, ease of cleaning, lubricity/reduced friction; fully functional for a minimum of 15,000 rounds (Threshold)/30,000 rounds (Objective), performing up to the standards and firing rates to be published in the Solicitation, functional reliability exceeding that of the standard M4A1 carbine at high and low temperature extremes as well as other hostile (sand/dust/dirt/mud/surf) environmental conditions (2) Improved safety- delay cook-off, fail-safe features, fires/functions safely and without delay of draining in the Over-The-Beach (surf zone, weapon flooded with water) environment. (3) User Acceptance: operational suitability, increased live-fire hit scores, decreased live-fire engagement times, speed/accuracy of engagement, '''controllability in semi-automatic and full automatic fire''', improved handling qualities, light weight, snag free in movement through vegetation and battlefield obstacles." (Accent added)"<br />
<br />
== Standard Issue M4 vs. M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
Does the Army issue regular infantry (i.e. 4th Inf. Div.) the three-round burst M4 or the M4A1? I always thought it was the M4A1 (and please forgive me if I got to the party late), but from what I've read, it seems like they issue the regulars the Model 920, leaving the 921 for Special Forces and the like. -<br />
<br />
i think it all depends on the on-base armory. for example some armory's might still have some M4s. but i think the regular infantry does use the M4A1. however. Special forces dont use the M4A1 or the M4. they use the hK416/417. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 17:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:- Though I don't know for certain, I wouldn't imply Spec-Ops units use ''only'' the new HK rifles - As you've said, it all depends on what's around, and to a degree what the soldiers prefer (in the case of Special units). Though the aforementioned HK rifles are in inventory, that doesn't automatically cancel the M4s out - some personnel might still use 'em. Plus there are other weapons around, namely the FN SCAR series. Though I would agree use of the M4 with Special Forces probably isn't as common these days.<br> As for a regular-issue weapon, I agree that the M4 and M4A1 are both in use nowadays, with the A1 perhaps being more prominent. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 19:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Actually, Stan, my understanding is that it's the opposite. The M4 is the most common version, not the M4A1. U.S. military doctrine still discourages full-auto for infantry rifles, so it seems unlikely to me that the M4A1 is going to be more common. As for the SCAR, SOCOM just decided this past June that they weren't going to order any more SCAR-Ls for the foreseeable future, which means that even amongst most SF units, the M4 will remain their standard weapon. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:- Well, I wasn't too sure, but I guess that does make sense to stick with the burst-fire M4. Good point. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 01:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
The only SF unit that uses the M4 (920) that I can think of is the Asymmetric Warfare Group, but that's only 'cause they had to hand in their HK416s. According to a book I've got, that decision went over like a lead balloon with the AWG. -<br />
<br />
thank god. im not a huge fan of the SCAR-L i find it pointless. if you want to go with a new alternative to the M4/M16. why the hell would you take an unfamiliar weapon. alas the hK416. same rate of fire. same Picatanny rail, same attachments, same stock, same barrel, same trigger group, and extremely similiar internals. and Stan, i do agree. if i made it sounds like all SF use the hK416, i didnt mean to. i/we really DONT no what they all use. they pick their own. they could carry an AK-47 or a CAR-15 if they wanted to. we cant make generalizations about units that get custom made equipment. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 20:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
- No prob, dude - I'm just glad you got what I was gettin' at. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 20:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
i would be shocked if they couldnt pick their weapons. their the best soldiers on the planet. it just doesnt make sense not to be able to. it would be like giving a star baseball player a 10 dollar glove. itll do but why wouldnt they get the best thats out there. [[User:Dirtdiver6421|Dirtdiver6421]] 01:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Reg army units use the burst M4, not the full auto A1. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
A couple of months ago when I was at a military base there were Marines conducting a weapons demo with the M4 carbine. It was the 3-round burst rifle, but a question came up about the M4A1. One Marine said that they got rid of all M4A1s and only have M4s. I personally don't see the need for a full-auto rifle and 3-round burst is fine because it forces the user to slow down and most of the time the user uses semi-only, combat or not, but that is my opinion. The M4A1 is still probabley used by the US Military, but I'm not sure, I haven't seen one in a long time.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:29, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Accurized Rifle ==<br />
<br />
After seeing several pages of real firearms appearing in only one film or game, I was wondering if I should expand this page with a new section for the [http://www.colt.com/law/car.asp Colt Accurized Rifle], which to my knowledge has only ever appeared in [[S.W.A.T. 4]]. Before I do that, I need to confirm two things: <br />
<br />
*Is the Colt Accurized Rifle indeed another variant on the M16 line of rifles, or a separate take on the AR-15 design altogether? I suppose there's a reason why we don't include the [[Z-M LR 300]] in the M16 page because it's the latter--I need to know if the Colt Accurized Rifle falls in that category.<br />
*Including it on this page would make it the first Designated Marksman Rifle variant here. So far I only see assault rifles or carbines here. Would including a DMR in this page be a problem or not? <br />
<br />
If there are no real problems, I'll make a new section for it, but I have no idea where I'll get a non-copyright infringment image of one. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 01:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:It'd be the '''second''' DMR on the page. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 05:51, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the info, but can someone confirm that the Colt Accurized Rifle is indeed descended from the M16 line of assault rifles and not a separate take on the AR-15 design like the aforementioned LR-300 is? I still have no idea where I can get a photo of this DMR that respects copyright. All I have are game screenshots. Some help here, please? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 22:47, 24 August 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Removeable Carry Handle for Colt 9mm SMG? ==<br />
<br />
Does such a Gun exist?<br />
<br />
:Not as a production gun (Colt's website makes no mention of one, anyway), but the modular nature of the AR system makes such a configuration entirely possible. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Why do we have a Colt AR-15 SP1 category that is separate from the M16/SP1 category?==<br />
The guns look the same, sure the SP1 had a design change in 1978 (three prong flash hider was changed to birdcage, rear sling swivel was changed to A1 style and the color went from greenish grey to straight grey) but unless we see the stamp on the side that says "Property of U.S. Government" we can't tell if it's a real M16 (which WERE sold via Title II dealers to armories) and a Colt AR15 SP1 which was converted to full auto (which was done A LOT prior to 1986). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 19:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== About M4 Commando and M16A4 Full Auto ==<br />
<br />
Full Auto M16A4 (Model 905) is [http://www.colt.com/mil/M16_2.asp Model 901]<br />
<br />
[http://www.colt.com/mil/M4Com_2.asp Model 933] ''is'' M4 Commando (Full Auto)<br />
<br />
[http://www.colt.com/mil/home.asp Manufacturer's site] says it all.<br />
<br />
== Colt Model 653 barrel length ==<br />
<br />
Am trying to pin down what a gun is for a page I'm working on. It has a forward assist but no deflector, A1 rear sight, M4 length tubular handguard, 16" barrel with birdcage flash hider and a solid stock. Basically it matches the gun in the picture for the Model 653 on the main page, apart from having a solid stock but that is easily changeable. However, every source I can find about the 653 says that it has a 14" barrel. Was the gun made in different barrel lengths but kept the same designation, and if not, anyone know what the gun is that is pictured as a 653? Also, while I'm on the topic of obscure colt carbines, does anyone know of a model that will match a 725 (original C8 without the flat-top) but has an A2 rear sight? Thanks, --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:16, 16 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Can anyone figure out what this is? ==<br />
<br />
I found this hidden in my computer, I think it's a Colt Canada C7A1 as a base, I can tell it's C7 because of the Canadian leaf on the the lower receiver, it would be an A1 because of the removable carrying-handle. What the heck is that hand-guard? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:02, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[Image:Colt Canada C7A1 SPW.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Colt Canada C7A1 SPW?]]<br />
<br />
:Colt Model 750/Diemaco C7 Light Support Weapon - A modified C7 with an enlarged gas tube (hence the square handguard) and a heavy barrel for sustained fire in the squad automatic weapon role. The C7 LSW is not used by the Canadian Forces but has seen service with the Dutch and Danish militaries. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 01:34, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ha! I thought so, thanks. :) Should I remove this section or keep it. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:53, 28 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:That's not Colt LSW, that's [http://www.colt.com/mil/CAR.asp Colt Automatic Rifle]. Follow the link and you will see that the image is the larger version of the official one. Meanwhile, [http://www.coltcanada.com/lsw-page.htm Colt LSW] has optional folding carry handle. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 09:09, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Thanks guys. :) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 12:02, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Just to clarify, the Colt automatic rifle, LSW and LMG are all the same weapon. The original version that looks like the one above was the Colt Model 750, which featured a fixed A2 carry handle and barrel mounted bi-pod, and the newer version above is the current production Model 950, with the relocated bi-pod and A4 rear sights. As you said, the folding carry handle is removeable, and the picture on the Colt website is just one without it fitted (note the longer centre vent on the top of the handguard is the mounting point for the handle). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 02:48, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::The original version was based on M16A1:<br />
<br />
::[[File:M16A1 CAR.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
<br />
::The one you described was based on M16A2:<br />
<br />
::[[File:M16A2 CAR.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]<br />
<br />
Guys, remember back in the 1980s when Colt was trying to vie for the SAW role? Sure the FN Minimi was never knocked off its perch, but Colt came out with a Colt light Machine gun that looked a lot like this. They were selling the barreled uppers on the market for a while in the early 1990s (I know a few friends who have them, but I never got one). This looks like that reincarnated!!! LOL![[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:24, 29 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, that's all written on [http://world.guns.ru/machine/usa/m16-lsw-lmg-e.html Modern Firearms] :P<br />
<br />
::Ah yes, you only read about it monkeyboy ;) I was handling and firing that sucker! LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:11, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Oh, and I've found articles of why AR is more advantageous than SAW to US Marine Corps:<br />
<br />
:[http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/m249-employment-concepts M249 Employment Concepts]<br />
:[http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/m249-light-machinegun-automatic-rifle-role The M249 Light Machinegun In The Automatic Rifle Role]<br />
<br />
:Interesting reading, methinks :) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:13, 30 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Yeah it was. :) You know, I kinda knew LMGs were dying out. :/ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:07, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::: Not overall, it's just the role they are being used in (automatic rifleman). SAW is still very good in defensive role and laying fire on attacking forces ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 1 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Heat Dissipation Performance of Carbine Barrel Types? ==<br />
<br />
I was wondering, does anyone know what kind of effects the 'cuts' (originally meant for the mounting of the M203 grenade launcher) in the barrel of the M4 and similiarly-styled M16 & AR-15 series carbines has on the heat dissipation performance of the barrel? Do the cuts help the weapon release heat from prolonged firing better than a barrel that has a uniform thickness, or does it hamper that? Any input anyone can provide on this would be greatly appreciated. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 17:46, 8 May 2011 (CDT)<br />
:The step down for the grenade launcher is actually pretty negligible in terms of cooling (although it does create a point of weakness to bending), as what you can't see is the fact that as soon as the barrel goes under the handguard it is reduced down to the same narrow diameter as in the cut out, which creates a much bigger effect on cooling. The narrower profile sections have the effect of cooling down the barrel quicker, but they also conversely mean that the barrel heats up quicker, and the heat has a larger effect on the accuracy of the gun. The main advantage however is that it reduces the weight quite a bit. The original reason that the M4 barrel reduces in size behind the handguard is based on the M16A2, which does exactly the same thing where its heavy barrel is actually only thicker past the front sight. This was due to a cock up in the design, where they designed the gun with a full thickness straight barrel, and found that they could then no longer clamp the M203 to the barrel, so the barrels were simply turned down from behind the front sight post. The front of the barrel was left thick due to the fact that the thinner barrels on the M16A1 were being bent at the front from being used as pry-bars to get the loading bands off of shipping pallets. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 04:53, 6 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:There is a heavier "SOCOM-profile" barrel that maintains the same diameter beneath the handguards as the standard M4-profile barrel does around the M203 cut and it can mount the M203 just fine.[http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/v/vspfiles/photos/BCM-URG-M4-14SOCOM-2.jpg] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:40, 19 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== can you tell me what model of m16/car 15 this is ==<br />
<br />
sorry i do not have a pic but i can tell you what is like. me and my dad were talikng about some of the guns he used in the army and he was telling me about this one he said was like an carbine version of the m16a2 and it was like the m4 but had a fixed carring handle and it was used befor the m4 it had safe semi and burst and he said it just had ar15 on the side.-Steviebleckley<br />
<br />
:Sounds like the first batch of M4s that were delivered. This is the Colt Model 777, which is basically an M4 with a fixed carry handle, and 3-round burst as opposed to full auto. It is the brother of and visually identical to the 727 mentioned on the main page, where the 727 as full auto as opposed to the burst. If it didn't have the M4 profile barrel though, god knows. Probably a model 654 on an M16 lower receiver or something. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:02, 13 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
yes it had the same profile as the m4. i gess it was the 777.I will show him the pic of the the 727 since there the same well the 727 is full auto thanks for the info - Steviebleckley<br />
<br />
== Question about the buffer tube ==<br />
<br />
I'm not one hundred percent sure what it does, and (like the forward assist) that almost no other guns have it. If someone could just clarify, what does it do, why does this rifle series have it, and why don't others/what replaces the buffer tube in other rifles? Thank you in advance. --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 07:27, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Basically, it was installed in order to slow down the rate of fire. The very first M16s ended up using a different ammunition powder than they were designed for, which caused a higher rate of fire than desired (about 800 to 1000 rpm I think), leading to excessive fouling in the chamber, and hence lots of stopages. From the M16E1 onwards a buffer tube was added to slow the rate of fire to about 600-700 rpm, and a chrome lined chamber and barrel was added as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:47, 12 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
I'm not sure if this is practical in any way, or even possible, but is their a way to increase the rate of fire on an M16 without the problems of the carbon build-up in the chamber?--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 23:29, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:Why would you want to increase the rate of fire? - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 00:40, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
No reason, just wondering if it's even possible with a full-auto M16.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 08:09, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Probably, I see no reason why you couldn't. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:40, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm assuming the reason that the high rate of fire caused fouling was that the rate of fire was so quick that the bolt was unlocking and opening before all the powder was fully burnt in the chamber, leaving residue. I'd imagine that you could increase the rate of fire by removing the buffer, and just make sure that whatever powder you were using was fully burnt in the time it takes the bolt to open. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 14:29, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::That would make sense, since I heard the nightmare version of that was when the gas pressure was still holding the spent case in place while the extractor was trying to eject it, which tended to result in Horrible Things happening to the case while it was still inside the rifle. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:08, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
This might be a silly question, but why is it that the AR-15 design required the buffer tube, and other rifles do not? Is it just located differently, and if so why? It just strikes me that the lack of a folding stock option is a poor design, especially when compared to most assault rifles designed today, SCAR, ACR, etc. --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 18:57, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I'm guessing here, but from what I've read it's that the rifle had already been designed, so they had to work inside the box, as it were. The only options were either to make the components of the action a lot heavier so their momentum prevented the weapon cycling too fast (which would rather defy the point of using a lightweight aluminium receiver and suchlike) or add something on to slow it down, which is what they did. Rifles designed since have been designed from the ground up to avoid this kind of problem, so don't need to have a tube attached to a hole in the back of the receiver to fix them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 21:08, 27 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:The buffer tube does two things: 1) contains the buffer and spring and 2) allows the bolt carrier to recoil part of the way into it. The combination means that the AR15-series rifles are functionally a long-recoil design where the bolt does not slam into anything rigid during recoil and stops based on the pressure of the buffer spring. This--in turn--enhances the straight-line recoil and therefore controllability during automatic fire or rapid semi-automatic fire. It also allows the AR15 design to use the rear of the bolt carrier to actuate the automatic sear meaning the probability in this design that you can set a round off with the bolt unlocked during automatic fire is nil. (Look up some of the problems with the "Lightning Link" to get a better idea of why this works the way it does.)<br />
<br />
:Other designs often do incorporate additional recoil buffers in the stock, the FN FAL's without folding stocks do this and the plastic-stocked SAW's, but the AR15 design simply trades the ability to fold a stock for enhanced recoil handling... The idea behind the design was to make a weapon where the entire recoil force is in a direct line between your shoulder and the end of the barrel with as little jarring as possible. This is also one reason for the use of a direct gas impingement system and one reason why gas-piston AR's tend to eat the front of the buffer tube and buffer tube area of the lower receiver due to bolt carrier "tilt". The "lateral" forces of the piston tapping the top of the bolt carrier misaligns the bolt carrier off its straight line path and pushes that chunk of steel into the aluminum.<br />
<br />
:Oh, and the forward assist is to compensate for not having a rigidly connected bolt handle. (Like someone already mentioned). The reason why is the design is meant to be operated in a manner where you ONLY use the charging handle for initial loading and then unloading at the end (administratively). Every other time, you actuate the bolt using the bolt release on the left side of the weapon... --[[User:Deathbunny|Deathbunny]] 01:28, 11 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Noob Question ==<br />
<br />
Ok I have a really dumb question, what is the difference between the Colt M4A1 and the Colt M4A1 Carbine? Or are they the same exact thing? The only reason I asked is when I was looking at the page, the M4A1 and the M4 Carbine look exactly the same, so how can you tell one from the other? - [[User:1morey]] July 22, 2011 11:21 AM (EST)<br />
<br />
: The M4A1 and M4A1 'Carbine' are the same thing, the 'carbine' is just optionally showing the proper firearm type. As for the M4 and M4A1, well it ''does'' say the difference in the section but to answer - the M4 has Safe-Semi-Burst fire selection ala the M16A2/M16A4, the M4A1 has full-automatic instead of burst, ala the earlier M16s/M16A1/M16A3. Otherwise they're pretty much identical appearance wise (The M4A1 also has a heavier barrel inside the handguard, which of course you can't tell from the outside). It also notes some commercial AR-15 carbines are given an 'M4' moniker, but aren't the same as actual military M4s. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 12:17, 22 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt or not? ==<br />
<br />
If a M4 or M16 variant is listed on a page, should it by prefixed by Colt? I've noticed some people doing this but isn't it incorrect as the term M16 is the army designation as opposed to the Colt name (for example the Colt Model 603 for the M16A1). Either way, I would imagine that quite a few M16s or M4s in movies are manufactured by companies other than Colt, and even the US military rifles are not necessarily made by Colt these days. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:43, 3 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I am curious... if the military M4 and M16 are not made by Colt these days then by whom? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::There was a stretch in the 1990s when Colt lost the military contract and all the M16s were built by Fabrique Nationale (FN). Though many companies build AR15 platforms, only the company who has the contract with the Dept. of Defense can call the M16 theirs. If there ARE any other manufacturers being represented on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, someone needs to find out. I certainly don't have any contacts who would know information which is THAT current. :( [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 15:48, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::FN have stated that “the vast majority of M16A2, A3 and A4 contracts as well as spare parts contracts for these systems since 1989”, and they had a $7 million contract to make M16A4s between 2005 and 2008. Sabre defence also won a contract for a minimum of 4,952 M16A3 and 702 M16A4 rifles in July 2008 for the US navy/Marine corps respectively. Having said that FN also stated: ”...never was FN Manufacturing LLC, or any other small arms manufacturer, awarded M4 contracts. The M4 cannot be competed and always has been awarded sole source to Colt because of licensing rights restricting full and open competition until 2009” although it has stated its intention to bid for M4 contracts past this point. The US government took ownership of the M4 design on the 1st July 2009, so the M4 can now be manufactured for the government by other companies, but I don't know if this has actually been done yet. Regardless, M4 and M16 are government designations, so surely calling a gun a "Colt M4" is incorrect? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:09, 6 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Just checked the United States Army [http://www.army.mil/features/ official website]. It lists [http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m4.html M4 Carbine] as being manufactured by Colt and [http://www.army.mil/factfiles/equipment/individual/m16.html M16 Rifle] by Colt and Fabrique Nationale.<br />
::::Oh, and take a note of M16: ''"The '''M-16A3''' is identical to the M-16A2 but has a removable carrying handle that is mounted on a Picatinny Rail (for better mounting of optics) and is without burst control. The '''M-16A4''' is identical to the M-16A2 except for the removable carrying handle and Picatinny Rail."''<br />
::::United States Marine Corps websites: [http://www.marines.mil/] [http://www.marines.com/] don't mention the current manufacturer for [http://www.marines.com/main/index/winning_battles/gear/weapons_and_equipment/m16 M16 Rifle]. So I am not sure about them. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:24, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Just to throw a bit of confusion in here, there are actually a number of different rifles designated as the M16A3 by the US military. The first is the Colt Model 646, also known as the M16A2E3, which was introduced in small numbers at the same time as the M16A2 and is an A2 with an A1 lower. Then you have the flat-top Colt Model 901 which was introduced at the same time as the M16A4 (in 1994 I think) and I'm assuming this is the version that the above page refers to. You also have the Colt Models 941 and 942 which are the HBAR and HBAR LMG models respectively, but I don't know if they are used. Not that any of this really matters as we identify all these guns as A2/A4 anyway. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:24, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::::Well, that's because armorers don't have access to military M16A3s, so they just slap A2/A4 uppers to A1 lowers (correct?) because what Hollywood film director would want fixed burst firing gun (ignoring the fact that that's what soldiers and marines use) ? Or modify civilian semi-automatic replicas to fully automatic fire. In which case the weapon is to be identified as such. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:54, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Didn't mean to imply we are doing anything wrong, just that the definition of the A3 models isn't that important as they don't appear. Having said that, the original M16A3/M16A2E3 was just an A2 upper on an A1 lower, so this is actually what a number of movie guns are, but I understand that they are going for a standard A2. Regardless, back to my original question, do we call them Colt or not? My opinion is no obviously, as it seems that some if not the majority of M16s are manufactured by other companies, and there is the future possibility of this with M4, and regardless it is a military designation of a rifle that goes by another Colt name. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:31, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::My opinion: M4 & M4A1 should remain as Colt. And so should older M16s. Modern M16s (M16A3 & M16A4), since they have ''at least'' 3 official manufacturers (Colt, Fabrique Nationale and Sabre Defence), should go without Colt. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:37, 7 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== How to NOT shoot an M16 rifle! ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh1lyMyejpI] - Seriously, this is either really funny, or just painful to watch... you decide. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:19, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Wow, that was bad. Glad that guy's alright! - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:46, 25 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Also, notice how many times the gun clicks and the guy keeps saying it's a "bad primer". And then he keeps hitting the forward assist, pulling on the charging handle (which is seen ejecting the unfired rounds) and hitting the bottom of the magazine even though it's already back in the gun after he kept taking it out and putting it back in prior (Someone else in the video even says 'Jesus [name withheld], you don't know how to load these.' and the shooter responds with 'I didn't load these, [name withheld] did.'). I think that could have been a contribution to the gun exploding in his hands. But then again, I'm not the expert on M16 rifles, I'm only guessing. Anyone else got a better explanation? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 17:05, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::It was the shooter saying that the guy who came to help didn't know how to load them, and then that assisting guy said it was someone else. There is nothing wrong with tapping the magazine even when it appears to be seated correctly, as it makes sure it is all the way into the well. Although he did hit forward assist unnecesarily once or twice, I don't think it would have done any harm or contributed to the kaboom. The file description and all the comments say that this was a squib, and it was all the shooters fault for not identifying it and checking the barrel (there are also quite a few people that seem to think it is possible the load 2 or 3 rounds into the chamber at a time by repeatedly pulling the charging handle, but this is Youtube after all). But I don't think it was, as on the first misfire there was only the click of the hammer, and when he pulled the bolt back a round was ejected which wouldn't have been chambered if the previous "bang" was a squib. I've never fired a round with primer but no powder, but surely there would still be an audible "bang" rather than just the click of the hammer? When exactly did the bullet get stuck in the barrel, or am I missing something? Regardless, I would never use ammo I hadn't loaded myself, particularly not done by a friend of a friend. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:33, 26 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::I think it's safe to say that the idea of unintentionally loading 2 or 3 rounds into the chamber of an M16 rifle is an overstatement and pretty much absurd (I've NEVER heard of such a thing happening with the M16 rifles). But one person's explanation in the comments is that when the hammer struck the primers of the "squib" rounds, the 'click' in question was the popping of the primer, which popped with enough force to lodge the bullets into the barrel of the gun, but without the 'bang' sound since the powder of the "squib" rounds were bad. So when the explosion happened, it was because the hammer struck a perfectly fine round, or one with enough charge in it's powder load, and that bullet impacted the other bullets stuck in the barrel, which caused a high-pressure situation ending with the magazine blowing apart, and leaving the M16 rifle damaged (probably for good). Talk about good craftsmanship going to waste! But at least the shooter in the video was not injured in any way. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:51, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::::I could be wrong as have never done it myself (I am not a moron) but I am fairly sure that a primer going off with no powder in the round makes a louder noise than just a click, which is all that is heard in this video. Anyone know how loud just the primer from a .223 would be? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:05, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::::Apparently [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS1K1zJQhOQ this] is a .308 primer. Now bear in mind how far down the audio is turned (as you don't have to wear ear protection when he fires), I can ''kinda'' see that might end up sounding like a click. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:52, 30 September 2011 (CDT)<br />
:::::::Yeah, most of the time all cameras (except for maybe the professional ones used by filmmakers) capture certain sounds differently. It is possible for the primers of "squib" rounds to discharge with enough force to lodge the bullets into the barrel of whatever gun it's fired from (and sometimes it will stay there until the owner disassembles their weapon and removes the lodged bullet), and most of the time, the "popping" sound of the primers sounds like a "click" when captured on a camera similar to the one used in the video of the M16 blowing up in that guy's face. --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 00:28, 1 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I've seen this video before, looks like the guy was pulling a half-assed SPORTS drill several times while the weapon was malfunctioning on him. But yeah, shooting custom-loaded ammo with no reliable means of quality control is definitely not a good idea, as this video clearly demonstrates. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 23:52, 4 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Not working ==<br />
<br />
Why is the M16 page not working. It locks up my computer, and the network wont respond. It takes about 5 to 10 minutes before it will work.[[User:Gunner5|Gunner5]]<br />
<br />
:It might be your browser and / or RAM is having trouble with the size of it; this is the largest page on the site. What's the spec of your PC? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 00:03, 5 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
==Difference between original M16 and M16A2==<br />
I know how to distinguish XM16E1s, M16A1s, and M16A4s from each other, but how are both the M16 and the M16A2 different visually? Both rifles have no forward assist or removable carrying handles and the M16 can also appear with a "birdcage" flash hider. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 00:34, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
[[Image:M16-SP1-30Mag.jpg|thumb|none|500px|M16 aka SP1 (flat "slab side receiver") with an A1 "birdcage" Flash hider - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[Image:M16A2.jpg|thumb|500px|none|M16A2 Rifle - 5.56x45mm. Select Fire rifle (Safe/Semi/3 round Burst Only).]]<br />
<br />
:I'll try. Also with the caveat that I have to replace the movie M16s on the site. An IMFDB member whom I am eternally grateful for, pointed out that I had A2 lowers on A1 uppers. Though that works, it's also not correct. I have to replace the M16 pics with exact versions of each one, but that will take time. I just point this out to make sure that people know I'm aware of it.<br />
<br />
1) M16: original USAF contract in Vietnam and in the U.S. slab side upper and lower, 1st pattern duckbill three prong flash hider, original buttstock with foldable rear sling swivel. Early models had counter-turning screws in stead of pivot pins to attach the upper and lower receiver.<br />
<br />
1) XM16E1: 2nd pattern three prong flash hider, Chromed bolt, exposed mag release button (no ribbing) but there is a partial rib for the front pivot detent pin and spring, old M16 style buttstock and rear sling swivel, tear drop forward assist.<br />
<br />
2) M16A1: Birdcage Flash hider, Phosphate bolt but chromed chamber, mag release button ribbing to protect against accidental mag dump and full ribbing to the front pivot detent pin and spring, A1 style buttstock with fixed rear sling swivel (with stowaway compartment in the buttplate)<br />
<br />
3) M16A2: A2 style flash hider with no holes on the lower part, ring washer instead of lock washer, heavy barrel, round forearm, full ribbing on mag release button and front pivot detent pin and spring, front part of lower receiver is beefier and thicker as well as the rear part near the base of the tube ring. Updated and longer (by about 1") rear buttstock and thicker buttplate, slight finger ledge on the pistol grip about midway down. Adjustable rear sights with elevation control as well as side to side. A2 does NOT have a detachable carry handle. <br />
<br />
Hope this helps. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:26, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Don't forget that the M16A2 has semi/3-round burst as opposed to semi/full auto in the M16 (though you rarely see this feature used on-screen as most directors feel the full auto looks better than a 3-round burst). [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 04:15, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
No versions of the M16 has screws rather than push pins at the front of the receiver. The only rifles that have these are the Sporter 1 rifles (which is what all of the pictures on the main page are actually of). The M16s that pre-date the captive push pin (Models 601 and 602) have a large headed push pin that is held in place by a ball detent on the pin itself. Also, the "M16" category can be separated out into 3 different guns which the USAF used seqeuntially in turn. First is the original 601 which has green furniture, original "duckbill" flash hider and triangular charging handle (around 14,500 were made, 8,500 to USAF, 1,000 to the Army for evaluation and the rest to special forces, police, and a number of Asian countries). The 602 is the quintessential slab sided M16, and introduced the updated 3 pronged flash hider, black furniture, the current "T" shaped charging handle. The third "M16" is what is often called the USAF M16 and was the most produced variant, and was the Model 604. Early versions had the M16E1 type partial fence lower, whilst the later versions had the M16A1 full fence lower, and these weapons continued to be used by Air Force until 2001, when all M16s were updated to the A2 standard. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 06:58, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::Cool! Thanks [[User:Commando552|commando552]] As I've said before, I pulled movie armory weapons. Very rarely do I get access to actual firearms museums, but then 99% of the full auto guns were probably sporter conversions, since it was much easier to convert a title I to a class III gun prior to 1986. I have a LONG laundry list of photos to update thanks to you guys! ;) But the information helps. Also only in recent months have i realized how many franken guns were built in the 1970s/80s and 90s on the M16 platform. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:24, 21 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Pics of the different M16s I mentioned above:<br />
[[File:Colt 601.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 601 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:Colt 602.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 602 - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
[[File:USAF Colt Model 604.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 604 (USAF M16) - 5.56x45mm]]<br />
--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:48, 6 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Historical Question ==<br />
<br />
Anyone knows why XM177 never dropped the 'X' letter in it? If 'X' usually implies the prototype and testing stage, then why did XM177 have it with both upgrades and use in service, and the jamming M16s in Vietnam didn't? Or some other reasons? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:02, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Ignoring the USAF rifles (which got official GAU designations) the US Army only purchased a few thousand XM177s and the kinks were never really ironed out, so it is fair to call it an XM program still. Rifle was still in development stages really when US Army cut the funding due to Vietnam war involvement being scaled back.. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 13:27, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Were the Colt Commandos used in Somalia much more refined versions of XM177 program? If yes, I wonder why they were not put back in official service... --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:19, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Do you have a pic of them, not sure what rifles you are talking about. If you are talking about the Model 733, that is not really related to the XM177s. US forces purchased a small number of Model 733s for Special Forces and was called the M16A2 commando, although Colt later offered it as the M4 Commando. Rangers and Delta in Somalia also used both Model 723s (A1 rear sight a straight barrel) and 727s (A2 rear sight with M4 profile barrel) and these weapons were known initially as M16A2 carbines, before morphing into the M4. Till the early 90s there were still some Model 653s (called the M16A1 carbine) and XM177s with the long moderators replaced with birdcages knocking around as well, so there were probably a lot of different guns knocking around Somalia. These guns were not refinements though, they were guns from the 60/70s that were still being used due to the fact that the US Army did not produce a standard issue carbine till the M4. I'm not even gonna mention the franken-guns that would have been used by the USAF special forces at the time. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:08, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Ah, thanks, that explains it. [http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_123/449652_going_for_a_1993_Somalia_car15_build_and_need_your_help.html Here are the various photos]. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 10:26, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Carbine/Model 653/Model 727/Model 733 ==<br />
<br />
Firstly, forgive my ignorance in things regarding the variety of AR-15 models. In the model description it says that it was 'never adopted formally by the US Military, and thus never had an "M" or "XM" designation.' However, in the following section where it lists the movies in which we can find this rifle it is often found as the M653. Can someone more knowledgeable either clear up why there is this discrepancy? Thanks --[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 18:34, 23 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Editors (and video game developers) often confuse the 'Model', 'M' and 'MK' designations. M653 should be changed to Model 653. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:14, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Correct. Model "___" is the official COLT designation and usually comes first. Only when the weapon is adopted as an official front line weapon does it get the "M" designation. And all these minutia of details in the weapons history STILL gives me a headache! ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:01, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::So does that mean we need to clean up this section to take all the 'M's away?--[[User:Rebusdi|Rebusdi]] 08:11, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::I've replaced the "M"s with Models --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:22, 24 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Colt Model 978 ==<br />
<br />
'''I took this from Wikipedia, so it might be wrong.''' A lot of video games like to portray the M4A1 with additional burst mode. I read that the Colt Model 978 (a.k.a. "M4 Carbine Enhanced") is an M4 that features a S-1-3-F trigger group. I wonder how popular this variant was/is and most importantly when was it finalized and released? (if it was ever) - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 14:15, 25 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:The four position fire selector weapons were adopted by nobody as far as I know, with the exception of Greece who bought the Model 778 (don't know how widespread this was, have just seen a few in some pics), which is basically a Model 727 with the four position selector. You can actually buy parts for a four position selectors, sears and disconnectors from Colt, so guns can be modified to this standard. However, I guarantee you that no guns in games actually have the correct four position selector, as it looks different to the standard one. Can't find any pics right now, but the four position selector is a flat plate with a ridge along the centre that ends in an odd knurled dome, sort of like a citrus juicer.<br />
<br />
:I have also heard of US Special Forces having the four posiiton M4A1s (Model 978), but may just be rumors, and if true there are very few of them and certainly not widespread. They could also be modifications to standard M4s. Below is a pic of the side of a Model 738 M4 Commando Enhanced (Model 733 with the four position selector) showing the selector switch design.<br />
<br />
:--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:37, 25 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:[[File:Colt Model 738.jpg|thumb|500px|none|Colt Model 738 "M4 Commando Enhanced" fire selector.]]<br />
<br />
:Which games portray the M4A1 with additional burst mode, for example? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 06:40, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Ghost Recon features the normal A1 and the "M4 SOCOM" which has the bonus burst mode. Same in The Sum of All Fears game (both Tom Clancy games). Cannot think of any other games right now. (Maybe I was a little exaggerating when I wrote "a lot of" since in most games you can't even toggle the rof.) So, according to what commando552 wrote, it is possible that the M4A1 with S-1-3-F group in Ghost Recon was intentional, since you control a (fictional) U.S. special force. (And the correct trigger groups: We (at least I) don't take the selectors into account, since in most games you cannot even see them, or are set to safe while the gun goes all rock&roll.)- [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 07:55, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Well, yeah, the universe of Tom Clancy is the one where the prototypes and ultra rare things come true, including weapons and vehicles, so the presence of AR-15-type firearm with four-position selector switch shouldn't come as surprise ;) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 08:48, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::Bozitojugg3rn4ut, the selector really should be taken into account, as apart from the receiver markings the selector switch is the only external difference between the regular Colt carbines and the Enhanced version with burst and auto. If it has the regular fire selector and lacks the markings on the receiver, then it is simply and M4 with the wrong fire control group. Is very hard to tell from the Ghost Recon screen shots as there aren't any of the relevant side, but you can just make out that there are only 3 positions marked on the right side of the receiver, making the physical model that of a regular M4/M4A1 rather than an Enhanced M4. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 09:09, 26 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Interestingly, this discussion is the first result when one Googles "Colt Model 978". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:05, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Main Page ==<br />
<br />
There are 2 issues:<br />
<br />
1) Shouldn't it be called AR-15, since ArmaLite AR-15 is the weapon that started it all?<br />
<br />
2) There is at least 1 not-rifle on the page: [[M16 rifle series#Colt 9mm Submachine Gun|Colt 9mm Submachine Gun]]<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:58, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree, AR-15 makes much more sense to me. I would call the page "AR-15 Variants", gets rid of the problem that "M16" is only relevant 5 or 6 of the 30 or so guns on the page, and the fact that rifle is not necessarily the correct term for all of them. I'm not sure how the site mechanics work, but would changing the name of the page create a massive problem for the 1000+ pages that link here, or would the redirects sort it all out? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:44, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Need to contact admins and ask them about this. I support your version, as more appropriate one. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:17, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:::Though you are technically correct, M16 is the most widely recognized nomenclature for the weapons that appear in films. Remember that we are not a gun encyclopedia, we are a weapons in MOVIE/TV/et al wiki. Sure, we utilized those rules of starting with the original weapon when it came to more obscure weapons (like grouping the R4s in with the Galils), but really famous weapons have their own pages, weapons that a firmly entrenched with their own identity in the mind of the movie going public. We also did not start a StG-44 page and then branch the AK-47s out from that even though the AKs obviously were a stepchild of the StG-44 Design theory. Very rarely are guns 'presented' as AR-15s in media. In fact many movie goers don't even recognize the term. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 18:13, 30 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::::I don't remember many movies where the character says: "Here is my M16!" or where the weapon is listed in closing credits :\<br />
::::The reason for AK-47 not being on the same page as StG-44 is having completely different design. AK-47 was ''inspired'' by StG project, nothing more. There are a lot of weapons that bear a ''resemblance'' to AK-47 or AR-15 but have different design and thus their own page. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:29, 31 October 2011 (CDT)<br />
::::'''P.S.''' Imagine IMFDB consisting of pages: ''"M1911"'', ''"Desert Eagle"'', ''"MP5"'', ''"Garand"'', ''"M14"'', ''"M16"'', ''"AK-47"'', ''"Everything Else"'' :D<br />
<br />
::::Now, [http://kingshamus.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/official.jpg THIS] made me laugh xD --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:34, 4 November 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== What is the point of the Colt 9mm SMG? ==<br />
<br />
Every time I look at it just seems so useless. I mean, why would anyone want what is essentially an M4 that does less damage with less range? Recoil would be lower I presume, but I cant see an M4 having a gigantic amount of recoil. I'm sure someone could help provide me with some insight but at the moment I'm finding it very hard pressed to find a purpose of this thing. [[User:Lurker McNasty|Lurker McNasty]] 14:20, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:I imagine it had more to do with some guys at Colt wanting to get in on the 9mm subgun market but not wanting to design an entire new platform to do it with. The 9mm round also gives you less penetration, which is good if, say, you're trying to shoot the guy you're aiming at only rather than him and the three things behind him. This is why the majority of people who actually use it are police or police-like units. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:42, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::The main advantage of it is that it is an SMG with the same ergonomics as an AR-15 platform, which makes training easier. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 15:27, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::9mm is much easier to suppress compared to 5.56. But Evil Tim's answer about Colt not wanting to design a whole new SMG is probably the right one.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 16:13, 14 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M4 Scope optics ==<br />
<br />
Can someone give me some info on what is the standard scope optic for the military, and what is the best scope optic to use on the M4? i was just curious--Gunner5<br />
<br />
:Which military? The M4 is used by a number of them in some capacity. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:53, 19 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
U.S. Military.--Gunner5<br />
<br />
:The most common, I would think, are the ACOG and Aimpoint RDS, but just about any optic can be used on it. As far as what's the best optic to use, "best" is a relative term and depends on the individual shooter and what he/she prefers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:01, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Not to mention different optics are more effective in certain situations than others; most ACOGs typically use 4x magnification and are effective for engaging targets at a distance, while red dot sights don't use magnification and are more suited for close-range engagements. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 21:21, 12 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== USE WITH S.A.S ==<br />
<br />
Why does the S.A.S use the M16A2 as their standard rifle? In Bravo Two Zero (the book), Andy McNab calls the M16A2 a 4x4, and the SA80 a Rolls-Royce. Looking back, the S.A.S have a history of using foreign weapons. Why is this? Do Britain not make good enough weapons? Sure, the only thing we currently make and export are Accuraccy International's (which are the best sniper rifles in the world, and I don't care what anyone else says. It strikes me as strange, though, why the S.A.S use the AW50 and not the AS50 as their heavy-caliber sniper rifle), but why do the S.A.S have to use American weapons? Why not use German?<br />
<br />
:"...''have'' to use American weapons?" You have some kind of grudge against American weapons or something? :P In any case, the events of ''Bravo Two Zero'' took place during the first Gulf War, so I really doubt they're still using M16A2s in this age of optics and rail systems. It's my understanding that their ''current'' "standard" long gun is the C8FTHB carbine, which is essentially an M4A1 with a 16" barrel of different profile to that of a standard M4. As to why, well, they use what they ''want'' to use, whether it be British, American, German, whatever. Much like their American counterparts in CAG and DEVGRU, they have the leeway and budget to get a little bit of everything because their mission calls for it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 7 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The SAS adopted the M16 as a replacement for the 7.62 L1A1 SLR which was the standard British rifle at the time. The SLR was superior in terms of reliability, accuracy and range, but the M16 had a major weight advantage in terms of both the weapon and the ammunition, could mount a grenade launcher, and was capable of automatic fire (so was the SLR, but a match was required to be inserted into the action). One of the reasons they continued to use it after the introduction of the SA80 rifles was due to initial reliability problems, along with the fact that until relatively recently the SA80 culd not use an underbarrel grenade launcher (M16s were also used by other units, such as some Royal Marine units and the Pathfinders). Don't really know the exact reason why the SAS (along with Military Police and Royal Marine close protection along with a few others) use the C8SFW/CQB rather than the SA80 but would imagine it is partially due to the lower weight and the modularity of the SFW (bear in mind that the SA80 didn't have a railed forened until a few years ago and has only just gotten a MIL-STD-1913 on the top for different sights). Unlike the M16s adopted before, the C8 has actually been officially adopted by the MOD as the L119A1 (both the SFW and the CQB share the same designation though). --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 16:17, 7 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::L119A1 is the official designation for C8 SFW in British SF service. C8 CQB is just its variant. An analogy would be M4A1 (official service) and Colt Commando (unofficial service). --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 13:50, 8 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::::The Colt Commando moniker has never been attached to the M4, it's been primarily used to refer to previous A1-pattern carbines like the XM177 series. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:30, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::::Colt currently markets the Model 933 as the M4 Commando, and several models have the "M4 Commando" rollmarks on the left side of the lower receiver as well. It is a bit messed up though also being stamped as the "M16A2 Commando" (making no sense as it is a flattop), or simply "M4LE" on law enforcement Commandos. The Commandos in particular demonstrate the practice of cobbling guns together from whatever bits are available. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 19:44, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::::Another reason the SAS don't use the SA80 is because you cannot use it in your left hand and they prefer to be able to use a weapon in both hands as it's better for shooting from behind cover. --[[User:Cool-breeze|cool-breeze]] 13:12, 12 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::"Why not use German?" Aside from the fact that if you say SAS most people with think of "Black Kit" with an MP5, there is still some rumours flying around about them using the 416 and 417. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 04:30, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Probably thrown around by HK's PR department, they sold a ton of MP5s off the back of the SAS using them to break up the Iranian Embassy Siege. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:20, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Using the HK416 might be BS, but British Special Forces do use the HK417. It was bought a few years ago as a DM rifle before the army got the L129A1. It was also more widely tested by the Royal Marines in the role, but was replaced when the L129A1 was adopted. [http://www.eliteukforces.info/images/gallery/uksf/sfsg-multicam-hr.jpg Here] is a photo of an SFSG team, the guy second from the left in the first row has a suppressed HK417. They guy behing may also have one, but can only make out the stock so could be another AR-15 pattern rifle. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:51, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
::::::He's got a Minimi Para with a PIP stock like the guy second from the right in the front row; you can see the iron sight against his shirt. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 11:50, 13 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Page Title ==<br />
<br />
While this page contains many weapons based on the AR-15, shouldn't it be called "AR-15 family of weapons" or something like than rather that just "M16 rifle series"? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 12:36, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:Look 4 topics above this one. If it was up to me I would call it "AR-15 rifle series" or something like that, but MPM2008 made the point that although this would be technically correct the average person coming to site would be much more familiar with the term M16, which is fair enough. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:53, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sniper Rifles? ==<br />
<br />
How are we defining "Sniper Rifles" for [[:Category:Sniper Rifle]]. It seems to me that all the guns on this page are Assault Rifles. I know that you can certainly convert an M16 to a sniper rifle but all the images seem to be of Assault rifles. Just curious! --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 19:47, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:The main rifle on here that I would class as a sniper rifle is the Mk 12 SPR but there are also the Vietnam-era M16 sniper variants, the Model 655 and 656. There are also some "target" AR-15s like the Colt Accurized Rifle and the Match Target Competitions that I would probably class as sniper rifles if I had to put them into a category. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 20:21, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Sadly, it seems that Colt has discontinued the Colt Accurized Rifle for the time being. I checked my old link on the [[SWAT 4]] page and it no longer works, nor is the Colt Accurized Rifle anywhere to be found on their product page sections of their website (maybe it just couldn't compete with similar products from other companies?). I was hoping the Colt Accurized Rifle would have been included on this page--I guess that won't be the case now, for how can a firearm be included here on this wiki if it failed to make much of an impact (to the point that it was discontinued) and thus won't be in many pieces of audio-visual media? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 21:57, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::I missed the Mk 12 SPR. I 100% agree with you on that one, that is DEFINATELY a sniper. Thanks for clarifying! Any change we could could put a definition on the [[:Category:Sniper Rifle]] page like the one that is on the [[:Category:Assault Rifle]] page? --[[User:Zackmann08|Zackmann08]] 20:28, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::The 655 and 656 were full-auto capable, so I wouldn't exactly lump them in as sniper rifles. Same goes for the Mark 12, if you want to get technical. The Mark 12 grew out of a program to create a SOPMOD upper receiver component that the shooter could switch out with his M4 upper when in need of increased range and accuracy. So in its original form, the SPR was still technically an assault rifle (and as such it's still frequently used in that manner by SOF who switch out uppers on full-auto lowers), it just had a high-magnification scope, and we all know that just sticking a scope on an AR doesn't make it a sniper rifle. It didn't lose its full auto capability until it was type-classified as an individual weapon. Mark 12s in regular grunts' hands would likely be dedicated sniper rifles, but those you see in use by SOF are more than likely just SPR uppers on M4 lowers. There's a similar distinction between Mark 18s (complete type-classified weapon with 10.5" uppers on refurbished M16A1 lowers) and "M4A1 CQBRs" (10.3" uppers on M4 lowers). [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 20:55, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:::Just because something has full automatic capability doesn't mean it is not a sniper rifle. It is unusual and arguably unnecessary, but as far as I know there is no official definition of what a sniper rifle does and does not have. In my opinion it is a sniper rifle if it is designed for and used in the sniping role. Hell, you can even call small caliber stuff like the Ruger 10/22 a sniper rifle as it has been used as one. For the purposes of this site though, I think the category should be used if the rifle ''appears'' to be a sniper rifle to the average user who might be trying to identify something. In other words, a catch all term for sniper, designated marksman, target and hunting rifles. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 21:14, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:I was under the impression that a dedicated sniper rifle had to have (at a minimum) a scope, be chambered in a full-size rifle round (so as to allow for accurate distant shots with high stopping power, a key part of sniping), be ergonomically suited for use while prone (i.e., its magazine must not be so large as to create an obstruction when lying on the ground on your stomach, and preferably have a bipod) and allow for accurate semi-automatic/bolt-action fire (fully-automatic or burst-fire is possible but counter-productive for accurate long-range shots, and such capability is usually reserved for Designated Marksmen who must travel with a squad and still keep some close-quarters firepower if necessary). So something like the VSS Vintorez wouldn't count because its round is short-ranged (up to 400 meters only given its subsonic velocity, so it's more of an accurized "special purpose" assault rifle), while the SVD would, due to its scope, 7.62x54mmR caliber, small magazine size to ensure it doesn't get in the way when used while prone (I'm very confused as to why the Soviets never put a bipod on the SVD, however), and semiautomatic-only nature. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 21:57, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
::As we only have the sniper rifle category here, I would class the VSS Vintorez as such, as it is designed as a suppressed sniper rifle. By virtue of the fact that it is suppressed it uses a lower power shorter range cartridge than a typical sniper rifle, but not all sniping is long range. If you were to use an integrally suppressed [[Accuracy_International_Arctic_Warfare_series#Accuracy_International_Arctic_Warfare_Suppressed|AWS]] with subsonic ammunition the range would be limited like on the Vintorez, but that doesn't mean it is no longer a sniper rifle. In particular, for police and some special forces uses long range is not as important in a sniper rifle as accuracy and other considerations. Like I said before, silenced Ruger 10/22s have been used by special forces for almost silent sniping. Another example would be the Russian SV-99, which is a silent sniper rifle based on a .22LR biathlon rifle. Weapons like these are specialized sniper rifles, but they are still sniper rifles none the less. I'm not sure whether trying to make a fixed definition for a sniper rifle is a good idea, as you will always find exceptions. Not all "sniper rifles" even use telescopic sights, an example being the Barrett M82A2 which uses a 1x red dot sight as it was actually designed for shooting from the shoulder as a low cost anti helicopter weapon. Another rifle that breaks your definition would be the [[BMS Milcam Rifle Series|BMS Snicam]] which is undeniably a sniper rifle, but uses a 5.56mm cartridge from 20/30 round STANAG magazine. Different sniper rifles have wildly different characteristics depending on the specific task they are designed for. The only thing I can say about what should be in the sniper rifle category is if it looks like one, put it in there. This isn't an encyclopaedia, the idea of the categories is to help people identify unknown guns, so if it looks like a sniper rifle that is the category they will be looking in. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:13, 19 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== About charging handle ==<br />
<br />
From [http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/11/foghorn/ask-foghorn-what-does-a-forward-assist-do/ The Truth About Guns]:<br />
<br />
''"Ever since, part of the military’s manual of arms for loading the M16 and its variants includes a mandatory smacking of the charging handle even if it isn’t necessary."''<br />
<br />
Is it about racking the charging handle? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:51, 28 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:S%C3%B6ldner:_Secret_Wars&diff=536897Talk:Söldner: Secret Wars2012-03-24T09:26:33Z<p>Masterius: /* Weapons' description */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>==AWM==<br />
Can you upload a shot of the AWM's reload to show whether the stock is fixed or folding? So far it looks like a standard AW, as it has no fluted barrel. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 04:41, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:And I might be wrong, but the Ak 5C looks more like an Ak 5D. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 05:00, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::Hi, I agree on the Ak 5D (we should also have a page for that rifle). But regarding the AWM, unfortunately the reloading animation doesn't show the stock. The menu animation of the gun however shows a fixed stock, and so does the world model. --[[User:Benny Frandsen|Benny Frandsen]] 16:21, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
The game may treat both M16s as separate A1s and A2s, but the in-game model, which the page says is shared between both, is an M16A1 with A2 handguard. Since it's IMFDB's policy to identify based on what they ''look'' like, the M16 entry should be altered to reflect that. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:15, 23 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Weapons' description ==<br />
<br />
Why the need to mention the lack of manufacturer before the weapon's name? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:26, 24 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=536684User:Masterius2012-03-23T20:36:36Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Intro ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St merc list.jpg|none|100px|]]<br />
'''''"Get out of here, Stalker!"'''''<br />
<br />
=== About me ===<br />
<br />
*'''Rank:''' User<br />
*'''Name:''' Dan<br />
*'''Eastern Zodiac Sign''': Metal Horse<br />
*'''Western Zodiac Sign''': Aries<br />
*'''Occupation''': Student<br />
*'''Location''': Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />
<br />
=== In a nutshell ===<br />
<br />
I read a lot about firearms. I am particularly interested in Russian Firearms. I handled some of them: several civilian hunting rifles and shotguns, and basic Soviet weaponry (listed at the bottom of the page).<br />
<br />
And as of 11.11.11 I don't edit any primary pages (sans mine), less the admins will find my actions controversial and ban me, and only participate in discussions (secondary pages).<br />
<br />
== My favorite films ==<br />
<br />
*[[Apocalypse Now|Apocalypse Now Redux]]<br />
*[[Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Blood Diamond]]<br />
*[[Born on the Fourth of July]]<br />
*[[Che Part One: Argentine|Che: Part One]]<br />
*[[Che Part Two: Guerrilla|Che: Part Two]]<br />
*[[Enemy at the Gates]]<br />
*[[Full Metal Jacket]]<br />
*[[Green Zone]]<br />
*[[Jarhead]]<br />
*[[Platoon]]<br />
*[[First Blood|Rambo: First Blood]]<br />
*[[Saving Private Ryan]]<br />
*[[Sucker Punch (2011)|Sucker Punch]]<br />
*[[9th Company|The 9th Company]]<br />
*[[Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost), The|The Brest Fortress]]<br />
*[[Hurt Locker, The|The Hurt Locker]]<br />
*[[Thin Red Line, The (1998)|The Thin Red Line]]<br />
*[[Valkyrie]]<br />
*[[War Horse]]<br />
<br />
== My favorite video games ==<br />
<br />
=== SP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]]<br />
*[[Delta Force: Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Medal of Honor (2010)|Medal of Honor]]<br />
*[[Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising|Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising]]<br />
*[[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R.]]<br />
<br />
=== MP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Battlefield: 1942|Battlefield 1942]]<br />
*[[Battlefield 2]]<br />
*[[Battlefield: Vietnam]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare|Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1]]<br />
*[[Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising|Joint Operations: Combined Arms]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra 1: Ostfront]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad]]<br />
<br />
== Firearms I've got training with ==<br />
<br />
*[[Makarov PM#Makarov PM|PM Pistol]]<br />
[[File:MakarovPM.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Soviet PM - 9x18mm]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
*[[AK-74#AK-74|AK-74 Rifle]]<br />
[[File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Soviet AK-74 - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
<br />
== WIP ==<br />
<br />
Both page and lists are incomplete and WIP.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=File:AK-74_Bakelite.jpg&diff=536682File:AK-74 Bakelite.jpg2012-03-23T20:34:32Z<p>Masterius: AK-74 with bakelite magazine - 5.45x39mm
Category: Gun Image</p>
<hr />
<div>AK-74 with bakelite magazine - 5.45x39mm<br />
<br />
[[Category: Gun Image]]</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Medal_of_Honor:_Warfighter&diff=536677Talk:Medal of Honor: Warfighter2012-03-23T19:58:54Z<p>Masterius: /* Sniper Rifle in Trailer */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I hope it will be more exciting than the previous one... and set into the present day, or near future (as for MW2 and MW3)."<br />
<br />
<nowiki>*wonders how this one will Americanise historical events*</nowiki>[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:13, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar---[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"You're perfectly right, The Wierd It."<br />
<br />
If they set it in the near future, it'll just be another CoD clone with tacticool AKs, ACRs, G36s, and all that BS. Being based on real events (and people, in the case of Rabbit, Panther, and Dusty) is one of the things I liked about MoH2010. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Perhaps you're right once more, The Weird It/Spartan 198. Which makes the difference between it and Modern Warfare Games... Yes."<br />
<br />
== LaRue OBR ==<br />
<br />
I changed the M4 entry, but I don't have a picture of the OBR without LaRue watermaks. -- Spike785 2/25/2012 10:35PM<br />
<br />
Yeah, I went ahead and removed the M4 picture. No point in having it there if it isn't the weapon being described. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I suppose I should have done that. Should I link the 7.62 OBR pic? Or buy one and upload some sexy pics of it? [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 23:19, 25 February 2012<br />
<br />
Its not an OBR like I originaly thought, its a PredatAR. The handguard is too thin to be an OBR's, and the way the handguard angles up toward the reciever gives it away. [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 9:21, 26 February 2012<br />
<br />
:It is an OBR 5.56, the top rail is raised up higher than on a PredatAR. The 5.56 OBR is pretty different to the 7.62 in terms of the handguard being more like the PredatAR one. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MEU(SOC) Pistol? ==<br />
<br />
Is that the M1911 variant in new game? The lower part of slide doesn't seem to end like one. It could be one of custom M1911s used by Delta Force. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I'm just happy there's a 1911, period. lol Hopefully it appears in the SP campaign, though. I've no interest in MP. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:35, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
the M1911 makes me happy as well but I'd also like to see another SIG in SP. [[User:Bristow8411|Bristow8411]] 22:20, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Sniper Rifle in Trailer ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.medalofhonor.com/blog/2012/03/shoot-win Shoot To Win | Medal of Honor]<br />
<br />
It's one of the four: [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-cs5.php CS5] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-300.php TAC-300] / [http://www.mcmfamily.com/mcmillan-rifles-tactical-tac-50.php TAC-50] / [http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?clicktype=rifles M1A] (McMillan customized)<br />
<br />
And totally not M40 of any kind.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 14:58, 23 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Battlefield_Play4Free&diff=534904Talk:Battlefield Play4Free2012-03-20T09:24:33Z<p>Masterius: /* AK-47 is AKM */ Fixed</p>
<hr />
<div>who changed the M16A4 back to a M16A2? since when did the A2 have a removable carry handle. - Sike<br />
<br />
Am I missing something, or is the gun listed under UMP clearly just an M4? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 22:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You are correct, not sure how someone identified that as a UMP --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 23:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
M24 is not the default sniper rifle for the Recon Class, the default weapon is the SV-98 --[[User:SamLoskov|SamLoskov]] 22:52, 7 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== AK-47 is AKM ==<br />
<br />
The AK-47 has a stamped receiver on the screenshot. It is probably the same mistake they did with Medal of Honor's "AK-47" in MP. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:39, 31 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
And somewhat similarly, the "M110" in this game is quite obviously a Mark 12 SPR. [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/M110_Semi-Automatic_Sniper_System] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:05, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Made the nessicary edits to the info on the SPR/M110. As for the AK-47 being an AKM, I'm not so sure about that; it has the smooth receiver cover, no slant compensator, original AK-style front sight as opposed to the 'thinner' AKM front sight, and the AK-47 stock & handguard versus those on the AKM. [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/AK-47#Battlefield_Play4Free] [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 20:40, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::After seeing AKS-74U with milled receiver in [[Battlefield_3#AKS-74U|Battlefield 3]], this comes as no surprise. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:20, 20 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Battlefield_Play4Free&diff=534903Talk:Battlefield Play4Free2012-03-20T09:23:56Z<p>Masterius: /* AK-47 is AKM */</p>
<hr />
<div>who changed the M16A4 back to a M16A2? since when did the A2 have a removable carry handle. - Sike<br />
<br />
Am I missing something, or is the gun listed under UMP clearly just an M4? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 22:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You are correct, not sure how someone identified that as a UMP --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 23:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
M24 is not the default sniper rifle for the Recon Class, the default weapon is the SV-98 --[[User:SamLoskov|SamLoskov]] 22:52, 7 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== AK-47 is AKM ==<br />
<br />
The AK-47 has a stamped receiver on the screenshot. It is probably the same mistake they did with Medal of Honor's "AK-47" in MP. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:39, 31 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
And somewhat similarly, the "M110" in this game is quite obviously a Mark 12 SPR. [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/M110_Semi-Automatic_Sniper_System] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:05, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Made the nessicary edits to the info on the SPR/M110. As for the AK-47 being an AKM, I'm not so sure about that; it has the smooth receiver cover, no slant compensator, original AK-style front sight as opposed to the 'thinner' AKM front sight, and the AK-47 stock & handguard versus those on the AKM. [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/AK-47#Battlefield_Play4Free] [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 20:40, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::After seeing AKS-74U with milled receiver in [[Battlefield_3#AKS-74U]], this comes as no surprise. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:20, 20 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Battlefield_Play4Free&diff=534901Talk:Battlefield Play4Free2012-03-20T09:20:45Z<p>Masterius: /* AK-47 is AKM */</p>
<hr />
<div>who changed the M16A4 back to a M16A2? since when did the A2 have a removable carry handle. - Sike<br />
<br />
Am I missing something, or is the gun listed under UMP clearly just an M4? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 22:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You are correct, not sure how someone identified that as a UMP --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 23:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)<br />
<br />
M24 is not the default sniper rifle for the Recon Class, the default weapon is the SV-98 --[[User:SamLoskov|SamLoskov]] 22:52, 7 August 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== AK-47 is AKM ==<br />
<br />
The AK-47 has a stamped receiver on the screenshot. It is probably the same mistake they did with Medal of Honor's "AK-47" in MP. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 12:39, 31 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
And somewhat similarly, the "M110" in this game is quite obviously a Mark 12 SPR. [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/M110_Semi-Automatic_Sniper_System] [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:05, 13 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
:Made the nessicary edits to the info on the SPR/M110. As for the AK-47 being an AKM, I'm not so sure about that; it has the smooth receiver cover, no slant compensator, original AK-style front sight as opposed to the 'thinner' AKM front sight, and the AK-47 stock & handguard versus those on the AKM. [http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/AK-47#Battlefield_Play4Free] [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 20:40, 14 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
::After seeing AKS-74U with milled receiver in [[Battlefield 3]], this comes as no surprise. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 04:20, 20 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Doom&diff=534900Talk:Doom2012-03-20T08:33:01Z<p>Masterius: /* You kidding right? */</p>
<hr />
<div>== You kidding right? ==<br />
<br />
This must be a joke, right? Chainsaw? Plasma gun? BFG? WTF? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:46, 17 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
Admins, let me put the nuke tag on this one, pwetty pwetty pwease with a cherry on top?! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 16:40, 17 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
:Just put one on. If they disagree, they'll take it off. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 02:17, 18 March 2012 (CDT)<br />
<br />
I lol'd. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 03:33, 20 March 2012 (CDT)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Tears_of_the_Sun&diff=530236Talk:Tears of the Sun2012-03-09T08:10:23Z<p>Masterius: /* History */</p>
<hr />
<div>Well, I'm done. How does it look? -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]]<br />
<br />
:Great! Except that the weapon you IDed as an "AKS-47" is actually a Chinese Type 56-1. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
::It needs a small rewrite though.[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
I added caps from the alternate opening of the director's cut of the film. They have the triangular handguards of the 'Nam-era M16s, but I couldn't get any clear shots of the receivers for further ID. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]]<br />
:Please put captions on the screencaps. Please?-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 13:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::Didn't really know what exactly to put, but I hope those captions suffice. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]]<br />
:::Thank you Spartan! Great Job! Those captions suffice. Even if they are generic they suffice.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 14:03, 4 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::::I'm sure you've noticed, but you also need the gun picture and the page links. Remember, if you're going to make additions, it's totally welcome, but please follow format. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
::I don't think gun pictures are needed in this case since Spartan doesn't know what kind of M16s they are.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 15:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::You can always guess. And that only addresses half my request. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]<br />
<br />
:I do not understand why the medic and the signaller, who would carry the heaviest loads, are both armed with heavier weapons plus ammunition.<br />
<br />
i wouldnt call the m203 the heaviest load . theres the M60 , but that is strange . usualy some one else would have tham to cover those two positions but its a movie . -[[User:simmons 8492|simmons 8492]]<br />
<br />
<br />
== Not an M1A ==<br />
<br />
If you enlarge the second picture and look at the stock near the rear of the reciever, you'll see that it is cut for the selector switch. No M1A stock is like this, but all wood stocked M21 are since they're just rebarreled M14s with the selector removed and a scope attached. --[[User:Zurak 47|Zurak 47]] 14:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:I just watched the film again and I agree with you. His rifle obviously has a cut-out for a selector switch , and M1A rifles were never fitted with stocks that had a cut-out for a selector switch, since they were civilian rifles. -Jacco Croon-<br />
<br />
::Somebody should do something about this. [[User:BurtReynoldsMoustache|BurtReynoldsMoustache]]<br />
<br />
::: It is correct, the first screencap itself shows a notch for a fire-selector, which is not on any civilian semi-auto-only rifles, only actual M14s and M21s. As to whether this is an M14 or M21 I'm not particularly certain (The same mod involving removing the selector was done on normal M14s), however, it indeed is not an M1A. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:30, 2 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
: EDIT - Going through the edit logs, I've found it was previously called an M25, which from what I gather, is what the Navy designates the M21 as (The Army uses the M21 designation). SO, to be accurate, I'll edit to M25 instead of M21. Of course, I still doubt whether it is an actual M21/M25 and not just a modded M14, but I guess we'll burn that bridge when we come to it. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 18:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It's a Modded M1A. you can see the reciver through the notch in the stock and not only is it missing the selector lock that is on a real M21/M25 but it is missing the Lug that mounts Select fire control parts. It is an M1A. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 22:03, 24 April 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
== Shotgun muzzle device... ==<br />
<br />
...is a "duckbill choke" intended to spread the shot pattern horizontally vs. vertically. They were also used by Vietnam era SEALS, primarily on pump shotguns. The intent is to have an effective, short ranges anti-ambush weapon for the point man. By aiming in the general direction of an identified ambusher and maintaining a horizontal hold, the shotgun can be effective against that ambusher as well as having a chance to hit/distract others close around him. In jungle and forest terrain with limited visibility and engagement ranges, ambushers would have to bunch up in order to maximize firepower on a patrol, especially along a trail.<br />
<br />
== The new layout ==<br />
Whoever changed the pages layout to the guns being organized by gun type. yea, dont do that again as i dont like it nor do i think the page that '''I''' made and put a lot of effort into. If you want to do that to your page, knock yourself out, but do '''not''' do this to any of my pages again. Thank you. -[[User:The_Winchester|Winchester]]<br />
<br />
Chill the hell out! Christ!<br />
<br />
== The Knives ==<br />
<br />
And Knives ???<br />
<br />
Where are you??<br />
<br />
:IM'''F'''DB. Firearms unless a cultural reference i.e. Rambo's knives. -[[User:The Winchester|The Winchester]]<br />
<br />
Here are the main knives used; Emerson Police Utility Knife, Sog X-42 Recondo and Emerson Kandahar. Gunner313<br />
<br />
== Doc's AK ==<br />
<br />
Doc is carrying older AK 47 not AKM. He also has early type magazine on it.<br />
<br />
== PP or PPK? ==<br />
<br />
The PP looks a little short. Are we sure it's not a PPK? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
It looks like a FEG PA-63 to me.<br />
<br />
==Uniform Goofs==<br />
<br />
Just thought I'd point out a goof I noticed in the Marines' uniforms at the end of the film; they had the sleeves of their BDU uniforms rolled up. This is ONLY done when in garrison, NEVER during combat. Some people might also say that their BDU's were somewhat anachronistic as well, but this can be debatable as the digital MARPAT uniform was still being distributed to Marines. In fact, news footage of the 2003 invasion of Iraq (which took place the same year this film came out) often shows Marines wearing the older 3-color Desert Combat Uniform instead of MARPAT (when they weren't covered by woodland-patterned MOPP gear due to fears that Saddam might try to use WMD's against coalition forces).<br />
::Technically manning a refugee checkpoint is NOT considered a battle zone. I've asked that question of Jarheads and they said that (a) it was probably really hot and humid and (b) whatever the uniform of the day dictated would be what they were wearing and (c) the moment a senior officer gets fed up and rolls up his sleeves because of the heat, all bets are off, the rest of the brigade will be doing it. They are not actively patrolling for enemy combatants or on an actual combat mission. They're border security at a refugee camp. So yes, that is the rule and in the field there are always exceptions to the rule. At least that's what my USMC vet associates have said. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]<br />
:::I'm afraid I have to disagree; the Marines weren't manning that checkpoint, they had just landed there via helicopter from the ''Stennis'' to extract Waters' team, which would likely count as a combat mission since Waters' team was under heavy enemy attack when the Marines initially deployed(albet the threat was neutralized by air support by the time the Marines got boots on the ground) and were in full battle gear as if expecting to engage hostiles themselves. Not trying to start an arguement, just pointing out an oversight in your asessment. [[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 10:20, 6 December 2010 (UTC)<br />
::::You're right if they are landing from a helicopter into a hotzone then it is a combat OP and they would have their sleeves down. Though that is operational doctrine, I would at least opine (according to MANY COMBAT vets in past wars, not now, but back to even NAM) that regs got loose the more combat you saw. Even among marines. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]<br />
<br />
[[Image:TOTS M16A2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|US Marines at the Cameroon border, incorrectly having the sleeves of ther BDU's rolled up while in a combat zone.]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Orca1 9904|Orca1 9904]] 02:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== M203s are Cobray 37mm Launchers ==<br />
<br />
I'm pretty sure that both the M203s on Doc and Zee's M4s are Cobray 37mm launchers. I'm basing this on the screenshots taken. If you blow them up to full size you can see the cocking handle on them.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:14, 31 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
:I'm looking at a very nice close-up of the receiver on Doc's launcher at the 1 hour mark of the film (the scene where they're at rest and everyone's eating) on my TV and I can tell you there's no cocking handle and the trigger guard is a rounded shape rather than square like a CM203's trigger guard is. They are indeed actual M203s. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 17:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Biased, Personal Comments ==<br />
<br />
Does it really matter if a Beretta 92FS made it into the movie or not? The comment of "While I was hoping to get through a movie without a Beretta 92FS, but sure enough, one shows up in the hands of a militant officer" seems unnecessary. [[Special:Contributions/71.200.27.204|71.200.27.204]] 11:17, 22 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
:Yes it is unnecessary. --[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 13:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
Berettas appear in pretty much most modern movies involving lots of guns, plus it doesn't really make sense of how it this militant officer had one. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that.) Its not a problem to see the comment so just leave it as is.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 18:25, 22 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
::Nope, IT IS UNNECESSARY. Or at least change the tone of the comment, making it more scholastic, and not the musing of a snarky, sarcastic critic. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]<br />
<br />
Why wouldn't the militant officer be able to get one? they can buy arms just like any other country. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 19:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
That comment has always annoyed me too. If you're going to lament the ubiquity of Beretta 92s in movies, you might as well complain about all the Thompsons in WW2 films, or Peacemakers in Westerns. I may not like the Smith and Wesson semi-automatics, but I understand there are people who do, for valid reasons, so I keep my opinions to myself, instead of using the IMFDB as a soapbox to espouse my hate for them.--[[User:Mr-Jigsaw|Mr-Jigsaw]] 22:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
For the record, it was originally a sarcastic comment due to the fact that all of the movies ive done in the past have had Berettas in them and being sarcastic doesnt work in writing. And honestly, i love Berettas and own one of my own. Sorry for the trouble. -[[User:The_Winchester|Winchester]]<br />
<br />
just saying but the movie battle of the bulge used all Grease Guns or at least dominately which is a nice change. just saying [[User:Dirtdiver 6421|Dirtdiver 6421]] 01:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Missiles ==<br />
<br />
Is it worth pointing out that the Hornets missile load outs are all air-to-air weapons, which would be useless against ground targets? Or is that to far out of IMFDB's area of jurisdiction? [[User:Pravda616|Pravda616]] 17:59 4/3/11<br />
:I've never found any AIM-9 Sidewinder or AIM-120 AMRAAM pages on this site, so I surmise that yes, aircraft ordinance such as missiles and bombs are out of the scope of the site. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 07:55, 21 June 2011 (CDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
== History ==<br />
<br />
Just wondering, has there ever been a time in history that the US Military was in Nigeria? I know the US has been in Africa, but I haven't heard of Nigeria, great movie by the way.--[[User:MarineCorps1|MarineCorps1]] 22:40, 21 July 2011 (CDT)<br />
:None documented that I'm aware of. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 16:09, 7 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
If I'm not mistaken USSOCOM sent in a unit or two. I have a book somewhere that talks about it, I'll see if I can find it. [[User:Puppet.of.fate|Puppet.of.fate]] 19:21, 7 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
[http://www.nigerdeltarising.org/article/2009/09/14/us-military-involvement-nigeria U.S. Military Involvement in Nigeria] --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:10, 9 March 2012 (CST)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:The_Last_of_Us&diff=530233Talk:The Last of Us2012-03-09T07:47:09Z<p>Masterius: /* Cool! */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Cool! ==<br />
<br />
Hopefully Naughty Dog will be able to make a decent Zombie/Survival/Horror game, unlike all those other suck-fest's in the genre since Resident Evil 3!<br />
:Do you mean ''after'' RE3 or are you including RE3? What about Code Veronica? RE0? REmake? All were fantastic games in every way. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:36, 15 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::Sorry, I meant 3 was the last really good one. I never played any of those "in between" RE's because they always seemed to be for some obscure system only. But these modern ones... RE5, Dead Island, etc... They're okay, just not the same. Dead Space came close... but in ''space''. I Am Alive probably won't happen and the next RE looks stu-pid. Naughty Dog usually does good work. I hope they can revive survival horror!<br />
<br />
::Well, Code Veronica X was on PS2, which isn't exactly an "obscure" console (in fact, it's the most successful game console ever made and calling it obscure is like calling the AR-15 rare). Code Veronica HD is also available for DL on PSN (not sure about Xbox Live) I wouldn't label the Gamecube (which REmake and RE0 are still exclusive to) as obscure either, really. And sign your posts by putting four tildes after it. ("~") [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:42, 23 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::No, you're right. I don't know why I thought it was a such a hassle? Just go back and get a Gamecube whatever that is ;) Oh and I never sign posts when I'm ragging on something as sacred as VGs!<br />
<br />
Dead Space isn't a zombie game, and there are quite a few zombie games that aren't "suck-fests" you just have bad taste, and if you're not going to sign your posts you might as well not post at all because post signing is mandatory here.[[User:Kornflakes89|Kornflakes89]] 17:29, 29 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:And not signing doesn't exactly make one's post anonymous... [[User:Acepeacemaker|Acepeacemaker]]! ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 01:46, 1 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Report me Kornflakes. This isn't really a zombie game either. -ACE<br />
<br />
Yeah, from what I've seen to call this a zombie game would be like calling Fallout 3 a zombie game. It's a totally different animal. --[[User:K|K]] 13:55, 8 March 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
This game reminds of "[[I Am Legend]]" film, doesn't it? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:47, 9 March 2012 (CST)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Medal_of_Honor:_Warfighter&diff=529925Talk:Medal of Honor: Warfighter2012-03-08T17:33:05Z<p>Masterius: /* MEU(SOC) Pistol? */ new section</p>
<hr />
<div>[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I hope it will be more exciting than the previous one... and set into the present day, or near future (as for MW2 and MW3)."<br />
<br />
<nowiki>*wonders how this one will Americanise historical events*</nowiki>[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 15:13, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar---[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"You're perfectly right, The Wierd It."<br />
<br />
If they set it in the near future, it'll just be another CoD clone with tacticool AKs, ACRs, G36s, and all that BS. Being based on real events (and people, in the case of Rabbit, Panther, and Dusty) is one of the things I liked about MoH2010. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 22:20, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Perhaps you're right once more, The Weird It/Spartan 198. Which makes the difference between it and Modern Warfare Games... Yes."<br />
<br />
== LaRue OBR ==<br />
<br />
I changed the M4 entry, but I don't have a picture of the OBR without LaRue watermaks. -- Spike785 2/25/2012 10:35PM<br />
<br />
Yeah, I went ahead and removed the M4 picture. No point in having it there if it isn't the weapon being described. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 22:53, 25 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I suppose I should have done that. Should I link the 7.62 OBR pic? Or buy one and upload some sexy pics of it? [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 23:19, 25 February 2012<br />
<br />
Its not an OBR like I originaly thought, its a PredatAR. The handguard is too thin to be an OBR's, and the way the handguard angles up toward the reciever gives it away. [[User:Spike785|Spike785]] 9:21, 26 February 2012<br />
<br />
:It is an OBR 5.56, the top rail is raised up higher than on a PredatAR. The 5.56 OBR is pretty different to the 7.62 in terms of the handguard being more like the PredatAR one. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 10:04, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MEU(SOC) Pistol? ==<br />
<br />
Is that the M1911 variant in new game? The lower part of slide doesn't seem to end like one. It could be one of custom M1911s used by Delta Force. --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 11:33, 8 March 2012 (CST)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=User:Masterius&diff=526345User:Masterius2012-02-29T11:35:26Z<p>Masterius: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Intro ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:St merc list.jpg|none|100px|]]<br />
'''''"Get out of here, Stalker!"'''''<br />
<br />
=== About me ===<br />
<br />
*'''Rank:''' User<br />
*'''Name:''' Dan<br />
*'''Eastern Zodiac Sign''': Metal Horse<br />
*'''Western Zodiac Sign''': Aries<br />
*'''Occupation''': Student<br />
*'''Location''': Almaty, Kazakhstan<br />
<br />
=== In a nutshell ===<br />
<br />
I read a lot about firearms. I am particularly interested in Russian Firearms. I handled some of them: several civilian hunting rifles and shotguns, and basic Soviet weaponry (listed at the bottom of the page).<br />
<br />
And as of 11.11.11 I don't edit any primary pages (sans mine), less the admins will find my actions controversial and ban me, and only participate in discussions (secondary pages).<br />
<br />
== My favorite films ==<br />
<br />
*[[Apocalypse Now|Apocalypse Now Redux]]<br />
*[[Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Blood Diamond]]<br />
*[[Born on the Fourth of July]]<br />
*[[Che Part One: Argentine|Che: Part One]]<br />
*[[Che Part Two: Guerrilla|Che: Part Two]]<br />
*[[Enemy at the Gates]]<br />
*[[Full Metal Jacket]]<br />
*[[Green Zone]]<br />
*[[Jarhead]]<br />
*[[Platoon]]<br />
*[[First Blood|Rambo: First Blood]]<br />
*[[Saving Private Ryan]]<br />
*[[Sucker Punch (2011)|Sucker Punch]]<br />
*[[9th Company|The 9th Company]]<br />
*[[Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost), The|The Brest Fortress]]<br />
*[[Hurt Locker, The|The Hurt Locker]]<br />
*[[Thin Red Line, The (1998)|The Thin Red Line]]<br />
*[[Valkyrie]]<br />
*[[War Horse]]<br />
<br />
== My favorite video games ==<br />
<br />
=== SP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason]]<br />
*[[Delta Force: Black Hawk Down]]<br />
*[[Medal of Honor (2010)|Medal of Honor]]<br />
*[[Operation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising|Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising]]<br />
*[[S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl|S.T.A.L.K.E.R.]]<br />
<br />
=== MP ===<br />
<br />
*[[Battlefield: 1942|Battlefield 1942]]<br />
*[[Battlefield 2]]<br />
*[[Battlefield: Vietnam]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty: World at War]]<br />
*[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare|Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1]]<br />
*[[Joint Operations: Typhoon Rising|Joint Operations: Combined Arms]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45|Red Orchestra 1: Ostfront]]<br />
*[[Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad]]<br />
<br />
== Firearms I've got training with ==<br />
<br />
*[[Makarov PM#Makarov PM|PM Pistol]]<br />
[[File:MakarovPM.jpg|thumb|none|300px|Soviet PM - 9x18mm]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
*[[AK-74#AK-74|AK-74 Rifle]]<br />
[[File:AK-74 NTW 12 92.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Soviet AK-74 - 5.45x39mm]]<br />
<br />
== WIP ==<br />
<br />
Both page and lists are incomplete and WIP.</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3&diff=525906Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32012-02-28T08:18:45Z<p>Masterius: /* Always Wondered */</p>
<hr />
<div>See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] and [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 2]] for older discussions.<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==<br />
<br />
Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:<br />
<br />
It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::The thing is while commercials are not allowed, ''trailers'' usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly ''all'' having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
In my opinion, I would rather create a small section for the commercial instead of making a separate page for it in compliance with Imfdb rules. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:IMFDB rules say nothing about trailers, only commercials which are ''not'' trailers are forbidden. I'm saying create a sub-page for it since it would be ''way'' bigger than a "small section" if you did it properly, which is how it should be done. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:26, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet ([[Sam Worthington]]) loads up his ACR during the opening battle in New York City.]]<br />
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet then switches to his dual Skorpions during the first engagement.]]<br />
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in Germany, The n00b aims an RPG-7 at an enemy sniper, as The Vet looks on in disbelief at such a choice.]]<br />
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b now shows off the skills he's learned from The Vet.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b ([[Jonah Hill]]) realizes the mistake he's just made in pulling the pin from his M67 grenade prematurely in the opening battle in New York City.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet draws his dual Skorpions. Interestingly, there are no holsters for these weapons. This could be a sly joke about game mechanics; in the games, the player's second weapon is indeed shown stuck to their back with no visible means of attachment.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet now stares down at an attacking Mi-28 "Havoc" helicopter...]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...and dodges an incoming missile from the Havoc.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b charges onto the war-torn New York City streets in typical n00b fashion; spraying from the hip and yelling a war-cry like you're Arnold Schwarzenegger. Just like any typical n00b, he also "noob tubes".]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Unfortunately, The n00b forgot about one thing; watch out for hidden landmines!]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet sneak up on the enemy sniper during the battle in Germany.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Watch, and learn!" The Vet once again tries to show The n00b how to prepare for combat properly during the battle in Paris.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b learns what it's like to fight in zero gravity in a recreation of the mission "Turbulence".]] <br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Take a break big dog, I got this!" The n00b prepares to show that he's proven his worth on the battlefield.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in New York City, The n00b switches from his ACR to his M1911. Smart choice. Not bad for a n00b!]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b fires his M1911.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet walk side-by-side on the battlefield, as the trailer's tagline appears on the screen.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Another n00b ([[Dwight Howard]]) comes onto the battlefield, displaying the typical n00b mannerisms.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b whoops with joy after spraying the battlefield with his M16A2/M203 combo.]]<br />
<br />
== Unknown grenade ==<br />
<br />
Any idea what this is?<br />
<br />
[[Image:MW3-Gasgren-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
It's the gas grenade Price throws when he's interrogating Waarabe. Looks almost like a VOG grenade with a pin stuck on one end, or an M34 after a crash diet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:21, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Desert Eagle ==<br />
<br />
Now that's settled, Evil Tim, can you do the same treatment to the slide markings, as I think it might actually say Desert Hawk rather than Eagle, but don't have anything on this computer to clear it up. Can make out though that this is a Magnum Research as the bottom line ends in ''Minneapolis MN''. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:[http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/GMCMA/Other%20stuff/2011-11-25_00070.jpg This is a slightly different gradient mapping] (you can still see the E, it's the same image, on photobucket to save server space), but it actually looks like the second word is completely missing. I don't see why, they thank MR and "Desert Eagle" (which is a separate thing?) in the credits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Thanks, to me it look like it says either "Hank" or "Hawk" and am assuming Hawk, as that is less mental. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST) <br />
<br />
:Ok, ok, calming down now. Here's where we get back to fun because the magazine is both correctly and incorrectly modelled!<br />
<br />
:[[Image:MW3-Deagle-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
:Notice the spacing imples four holes in the magazine (a .44 would have 5) but the number of visible bullets I believe implies a .44 (a .50AE would only have three, unless the side of the top bullet at the side is supposed to be the side of the one at the ''top'' of the magazine). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]<br />
<br />
::Also, .44 Magnum is a rimmed caliber, and while I don't completely expect them to get this correct, the cartridges in the magazine are not rimmed, which would be characteristic of .50 AE rounds. Just a side note! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:14, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I think it is meant to be the .50 AE mag, but is thrown off by two thing. Firstly the top round is smaller than the other visible rounds, and looks like it overlaps the top one as well. Secondly, the window is too long on this gun, being about a 1/3 the total length of the magazine. On a real magazine (.44 or .50, they are the same apart from the holes) the window in only about 1/4 the length of the magazine. These two factors combined mean more bullets are visible than there should be. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::The mags are pretty much made up to be just something to stick into the gun. They are so far from the real thing they can't really even be credited towards either gun.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:31, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Well, the number of "windows" does tell you how many rounds, and the spacing says 4 rather than 5, so it's just another mistake with 8 rounds in a 7-round magazine. You want horrible magazines you need to go back to the original MW, if you were ''lucky'' you'd have two completely flat bullets on the top that looked a bit like they were for the right kind of gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, but a mag window never extends into the feed lips like in the picture. lol... And honestly, I never looked at the original MW mags. I'll take your word there.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:50, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Well, I'm probably going to redo those at some point because I hate that page. Also, the window does that, I imagine, because they're BS'ing based on an Airsoft magazine, where the feed lips are instead the plastic top of the mag with the BB feeder and gas vent. I guess they knew there was a hole in the side of the magazine (which on the Airsoft version isn't a hole but a dip containing a little latch that releases the slide and such), knew there were feed lips, but weren't sure how the two things interacted with each other. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:55, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Lol yea we'll just go with that explanation... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:58, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The top of the magazine is correct, and the windows does extend up into the feed lips like this. See here for a side by side comparison of both .50 and .44 magazines showing this: http://www.magnumresearch.com/docs/MagazineOffer.pdf. It also seems like the crimp on the front of the magazine is different for the two calibers, but you don't get a good enough look at the magazine to work out which, if either, the game magazine is based on. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Yeah, you're right, I just checked a couple more images on Google to be sure. I can't imagine that does much for the life of the feed lips? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:18, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::: Yeaaaaa That explains why I've heard that the lifespan of DE mags are so short... Ok then lol --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 21:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 16:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I prefer the MW2 Magnum Research .50AE Design, but with the 8-Round Magazine of the MW3 Deagle! What a pity that Infinity Ward hasn't introduced the Round-In-Chamber Feature yet, perhaps they will for Black Ops 2 or the Project Iron Wolf... <br />
Anyways, the .50 Action Express (7-Round Magazine+1) is one of the most powerful Handgun Caliber, but not easy to control; <br />
that's why I would rather use the .44 Magnum (8-Round Magazine+1) or the .357 Magnum (9-Round Magazine+1), with less recoil and higher accuracy."<br />
<br />
== Mk 14 ==<br />
<br />
So, I guess they just figured "nobody's going to throw their rifle on the floor and ''check'' it's the same one the other guys are using, right?" And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for us meddlin' kids. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
... what's the problem? --[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 04:51, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The "Mk14" and "M14 EBR" are actually the same model (the Mk 14 Mod 0), even though it seems they want you to think the "M14 EBR" is the Mk 14 Mod 1 from the previous game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:17, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Since it's locked... ==<br />
<br />
Can a mod change the bit about the M65 Atomic Annie?<br />
<br />
"A doctored image of the nuclear test Upshot-Knothole Grable can be seen in some maps as a movie poster. Grable was a shell fired from an M65 Atomic Cannon and the W9 nuclear artillery shell was itself a modified antiaircraft gun."<br />
<br />
Atomic Annie fired 280mm shells. There were never any 280mm AA shells, and the design of Atomic Annie itself was based on German railroad guns, not an AA gun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:49, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:You're misreading. The W9 round ''itself'' is a modified antiaircraft gun which fires one subcritical mass at the other. The M65 is a gun which fires a gun which is a bomb. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:32, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::If it's just a gun-type fission device, can you clarify that? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:35, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Just did that before reading. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:41, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Thanks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:47, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
How come the page is locked anyway? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:55, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Haven't checked the edit history so I might be wrong, but my guess is too many people being dicks toward the game just because it's extremely popular and therefore bashing it everywhere it's brought up is the cool thing to do. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] 21:39, 15 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Speaking of which, what do you guys think of changing one of the captions for the Mk 14 Mod 1 to this (italics are my addition):<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14-4.jpg|thumb|none|300px|"Soap" MacTavish holds his own Mk 14 Mod 1 EBR as Yuri wonders why he's the odd one out. ''Presumably the developers intended for Yuri to also use a Mod 1, but for whatever reason, it appears as a Mod 0 when dropped.'']]<br />
:That's my assumption, at least, but I don't know for sure (especially since it ''does'' use the old Mod 1 model in another mission). What do you think? <br />
<br />
:Oh and also, in the second sentence under Mk 14 Mod 1, there's an extraneous "the" in front of ''MW2'''s name. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] 23:43, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Strikes me that if anything it would be the other way around. The most likely answer is that the Mod 1 model was ganked from MW2 as a placeholder, yet again.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Pc_wallpaper_04_1024x768.png|thumb|none|600px|Promotional art of Soap from MW2; scope has flared eyepiece, no notched rings to the rear, stepped objective. Note also long rail covers on the handguard.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14Mod1-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Mod 1 model; same old scope and rail covers, plus the same rather chunky bipod hinge.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|MW3 scope model; note notched rings, shorter flared eyepiece, flared objective.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14Mod0-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Mod 0 model; new, MW3-style scope, shorter rail covers and different handguard, gripped magazine base (looks like a Magpul with no loop) not present on the MW2 model.]]<br />
<br />
Then they decided to go for a Mod 0 instead. And, as with a load of other weapons, they didn't bother to change some of the models that were actually in the game. The Mod 0 in "Goalpost" uses a variant MW3 scope model when you're holding it, but the MW2 world model when you drop it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:43, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
A quick query about the M4A1 used in the game, as you may be able to see in the pictures below the M4 is equipped with a rail riser, including when using the hybrid sight.<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3-M4-1.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3-M4-2.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
The EOTech XPS-3 part of the hybrid sight is situated on the lower rail whilst the magnifier is on the rail riser. Wouldn't this mess up the alignment between the two? Doesn't really look right to me but would like anyone else's input. --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 15:50, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:[[Image:MW3-M4-5.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
:If you zoom in and look carefully there's a silver plate between the base of the XPS-3 and the rail which raises it up to the same level as the riser. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:22, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Ah, thanks. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to though... --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 16:48, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's most likely that they designed the rifle before they decided to use this sight with it. A bit like how they just stuffed the RSASS into "Blood Brothers" even though the level was blatantly designed for the Barrett. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 16:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Like the Desert Eagle, I prefer the M4A1 from MW2, even if the one from MW3 looks much lighter... ."<br />
<br />
== "USP45 Tactical" ==<br />
<br />
I would just like to point out that the supposed USP Tactical isn't one; it still has the regular USP's fixed iron sights for one thing. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 05:33, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:And has markings on it saying "USP Tactical," plus an extended barrel. It's a USP Tactical with the wrong iron sights. This is hardly impossible, since the Tactical uses the same dovetails as the standard USP slide so there's no reason you couldn't swap irons.<br />
<br />
:[[Image:Whatdoesthissay.jpg]] [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
So? Every other USP in the series had said extended barrel, but we didn't call them Tacs. Plus it's not like they've ever used correct trades before. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 06:27, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Ok, let me just copy-paste what I said ''last'' time this came up, adding the CoD4 USP since I have that too now:<br />
<br />
:Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:<br />
:[[Image:MW1-USP-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP in ''CoD4''. ''Barely visible'' barrel, slide says "(HK logo or something like it) USP .45 Auto." This is a USP 45.]]<br />
:[[Image:MW3-Nottactical.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP from ''MW2'' in ''MW3''. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has ''very slightly'' visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45.]]<br />
:[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has ''highly'' visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.]]<br />
:The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP.<br />
:Let me just break this down:<br />
:*Someone decided they needed a new USP model.<br />
:*They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.<br />
:*They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.<br />
:*They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.<br />
:Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I imagine, given the shorter extended barrel, the LAM in the first game and the possibly recycled from dev model rear sights in the second, the CoD4 / MW2 USP was originally going to be a Mark 23, and they kept the old barrel on the model for some reason. This new one's is in proportion for a USP Tac, and it ''says'' it's a USP Tac on the slide (which is a distinguishing feature of a USP Tac, after all). This is enough to upgrade it from mistake to intent, and the sights aren't impossible to swap between models and so aren't distinctive of the non-Tac model. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Just beat me to it. Was going to say that the rear sight and the raised part of the slide it sits on, and the amount of barrel projection was from a Mark 23 as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:10, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 21:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"The main difference with the USP45 from MW2 is that now it has been cleared to the players the fact that the one from MW2, when equipped with the Suppressor, is the same gun from MW3; the USP45 Tactical has always a threaded barrel for quick attaching a Sound Suppressor, which the USP45 can't actually use... <br />
Summarizing, the USP45 from MW2 becomes the USP45 Tactical from MW3 when a Suppressor is attached!"<br />
<br />
== "MG36" ==<br />
<br />
This image is from the official H&K site.<br />
[[Image:G36K-2.jpg|thumb|none|450px|Just ignore the buttstock, willya.]]<br />
They list it as a G36K, even tho it has a longer barrel. Maybe H&K classifies these guns based on the handguard and vent holes. It would make sense, as the barrels are interchangeable. Thoughts? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 16:11, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Not sure the barrels are interchangeable, as the gas block would be in the wrong place. I suppose you could put the correspondingly longer piston on (not sure if this would work but lets assume it would) but then the piston would be exposed, with the front part of it along with the gas block sticking out the front of the handguard. It would be exposed to dirt and damage, and would look weird. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:52, 3 December 2011 (CST) <br />
H&K makes a LMG/support gunner version of the G36 (don't remember the exact name). It looks just like your photo but as far as I know it's usually outfitted with a 100 round drum magazine instead of the normal 30 rounder. The name "MG36" is really just made up so the poor sap playing this game that knows nothing about gun would immediately associate the MG with machine gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 16:33, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I can't really see how a weapon with a non-carbine barrel is still a carbine, personally. Though it would hardly be the first time HK's marketing spods were guilty of making things up as they go along. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Wait a minute, HK's page has the disclaimer "The pictures shown may differ from the original." Isn't that an aftermarket stock, for a start? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The barrel extends past the handguard by a similar amount (slightly less I think) as on a G36, but the G36 handguard is longer, meaning that this is actually an intermediate barrel between the 318mm barrel of the G36K and the 480mm barrel of the G36. I believe the origin of this variant was that it was submitted for Norwegian (I think) army trials, and it has something like a 16" barrel. It now goes by the name G36KV3 I think. The stock isn't an aftermarket one, I think it was designed by H&K for the Latvian army. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:00, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Did a bit more searching and found that it is a 15.4" barrel, and the variant also appears to go by G36CQB. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:04, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Ah, only place I'd ever seen that stock was on Airsoft gun pictures saying it was a G&P "KV style" stock. So, we're saying this is probably a 15.4" barrel G36K? I doubt this variant has existed long enough to have been in ''Far Cry'', mind, so we should probably leave that saying hybrid. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Apparently the G36CQB was listed in the HK Defence Weapons Systems Brochure from 2004 to 2006, so it is possible that this is what the [[Far Cry]] rifle is based on. This is 2nd hand info from the HK Pro forums so might be wrong though. Have also read that it was first introduced in the late 90s for the US market, but only 100 or so were made so these are rare. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::This G36K, the one with the wierd aftermarket sights on a C rail and that stock, was made for one country specifically, though I forget which one. As for the carbine issue Tim, a carbine is simply a shortened version of the original, it can be any length as long as it's shorter. If it's a Carbine of a Carbine it's a Sub-Carbine. Not makin this up :) G36K = Carbine and G36C = Sub-Carbine. M4A1 = Carbine and Mk 18 Mod 0 = Sub-Carbine. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:42, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Far Cry was march 2004, I wouldn't think they'd have time to stick a G36 variant that had existed for an absolute maximum of 3 months (and might not have existed at all yet) in the game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:51, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::All I could find was someone stating that it was in the 2004-2006 brochure, but could have appeared before this point. Like I said, the first versions of the G36CQB barrel appeared in the late 90s. It is probably more likely that they just made it up accidentally though. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:54, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::Ok, I'll add a note there and fix this when I get home, then. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::I have a copy of Soldier of Fortune magazine from October 2001 that says the 15.4 inch CQB barrel is an option--[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 20:53, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::Ah, CQB ''barrel'', that's starting to make sense. So this is a CQB barrel for the G36 that they marketed for the K under the same name, even though it made the K longer and therefore only helped you CQ if the B was using it as a lance. Also, if this can be fitted to the standard G36, might it be the cause of STALKER's short-barreled G36E? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:47, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::::Could be. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 07:26, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::::The G36 from STALKER is actually modelled after a SL8 converted into a G36 lookalike (can tell by the profiling at the back of the receiver with a serial number plate, the selector switch and aftermarket magazine well fitted into machined out lower receiver). As for the barrel, it looks more like a CQB than a K. The K has an open pronged flash hider (as opposed to the birdcage shown) which would protrude past the handguard on a full size G36 but none of the barrel itself would be visible. I'm going to copy this whole discussion over onto the [[Talk:Heckler & Koch G36|G36 talk page]], as I think it has reached the point that it is more relevant there than here. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:10, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Sorry I was out of this for so long guys. As far as I remember, the G36 uses a quick-change barrel system (eventually used the the ACR and SCAR). You could go from CQB barrel to MG barrel at the flip of a tab and twist of the barrel. H&K figured out over time that they could simply market the same gun with different barrels and people would pay for two guns instead of one and a second barrel. Yes, the people at H&K are some of the biggest jerks out there. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:54, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Or maybe you only wanted a full length G36 with a shorter barrel. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:16, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
The G36K pictured above is a G36KV of the Latvian armed forces. They use longer barrels (15 or so inches, I believe) on them than factory G36Ks. Here you can see one in A-Stan [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v101/He219/mpnet/hires_090318-A-1211m-002a.jpg]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:57, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Oakley Gloves==<br />
[[File:RSASS MW3 being loaded.jpg|thumb|none|300px|The black (Oakley?) gloves in question. Notice the great detailing in the gloves' pads and stitching by the MW3 engine.]]<br />
Slightly irrelevant from the realm of guns, but I know that Delta Force members use the tan Oakley Factory Pilot gloves, but what are the ones that Soap and Yuri use during their Prague raid? I would suppose they're just the black ones, but could someone please verify? --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>''<br />
:I don't think they are actually Oakley gloves. Rather than the hollow "O" that is on the first section of the finger of genuine Oakley gloves, these appear to have a plain solid stud, which you tend to find on cheaper Oakley rip-off gloves, so imagine that is what the actual gloves were modelled off of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:23, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I thought everyone seemed to have SIs? (or were supposed to, keeping in mind the knockoff point above) [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:19, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
During the Prague missions as well as Stronghold and Down The Rabbit Hole Yuri wears black Oakley Factory Pilot gloves. As far as his other missions where the gloves have the missing fingertips, they could just be a similar-looking generic model. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 02:24, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== More guns ==<br />
<br />
In MP on unlockable embelms and titles: a Bereta 92 Inox, slide of a 1911type gun, flintlock pistol + Mk2 grenade on achivment "Strike!". These needs to be added to page - Paul<br />
:+ kind of unrelated to this but it'd be noted that the ump STILL hold 32 bullets by default, and the CM901 holds 30 bullets, but I think it is suposed to be the .308 cal variant which holds only 20. - Paul<br />
: in SP theres a MP5 w/ slimline forearm and w/o magrelease paddle on a sign during the levl with the sandstorm. -Paul<br />
: On "Black Tuesday", the US troops that show up with the Stryker have M1911s holstered on the front of their tactical vests.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 00:42, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Some more guns are a Sig in Price's leg holster in 'Stronghold', as well as another gun I couldn't identitfy in 'Blood Brothers', in another one of Price's holster. It looked liked Grigg's Springfield from COD 4, except w/ textures looking like they were pulled from Half-life. -= [[User:Taedeezy|Taedeezy]] 4:10, 7 January 2012 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I'll be going through again to get these soonish. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:18, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Also, according to the COD wiki there is a usable "M9" (92SB) on the level Down the Rabbit Hole. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:37, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:::Listed with [citation needed], ie it's some kid mistaking the USP for an M9. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:39, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Price has a holstered USP in Stronghold, not a SIG. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 17:59, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Type-95 is a 97 ==<br />
<br />
When I played the game again, I noticed the Type 95 doesn't reload the same way and the mag looks like a 5.56 mag. And when it reloads, it inserts the mag instead of the hook style. And the world game model and the menu model is exactly like a 97. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:43, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Soap's P99==<br />
<br />
I just played through the PS3 version of the game again. It appears as though Soap draws a P99 in "Blood Brothers" while Price is carrying him to the safehouse. Can anyone else confirm this?-Glamdring<br />
<br />
:Yes, he does. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:20, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MP7 Mag ==<br />
<br />
I just noticed that the MP7's extended mag baseplate (it's not technically the base of the mag, but what else would you call it?) is actually stuck to the gun instead of the magazine itself. It's really obvious in the second screenshot in the MP7 entry. Can anyone confirm this and possibly add it to the page? --[[User:Don Bigles|Don Bigles]] 05:16, 2 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Ah, someone added it. Thanks. --[[User:Don Bigles|Don Bigles]] 05:35, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I can't find a JPG pic which the upload page says i need, so i can't show, but it seems the MP7 reloads with empty magazines (Google "Modern Warfare 3 MP7 Reload" on Google Images), is this worth adding?--[[User:Z008MJ|Z008MJ]] 07:06, 8 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It's not empty, it's solid. I'll add a pic later. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:54, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Always Wondered ==<br />
<br />
Why, in games such as this, are correct weapons names (Desert Eagle Mark XIX, Brügger & Thomet MP-9) used but in others they are called the "Falcon 357" or generic names like "Sniper Rifle"? Anyone? Bueller? [[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 09:49, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I guess it's because Activision can afford to cover the copyright costs, name infringement isn't free.<br />
<br />
:Yeah, it's a trademark issue. Most companies haven't trademarked the distinctive shape of their weapons (though Glock and HK have), but they have the names, and it's much easier to prove infringement on a name than on a shape anyway. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:45, 5 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Activision has more money. Other game companies don't. wonder how much money it cost them for those huge logos like remington and EOTech?--[[User:Coltmth|Coltmth]] 22:29, 5 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:I assumed in the logo cases it was the other way round, with the firearms companies paying Activision for the product placement. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:42, 6 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::It's funny when big-name firearms companies resort to product placement. Do they really expect the military officials to play such kind of games? Or does America nowadays allow the sales of military-grade firearms (like those Remington rifles) to civilian population? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::If you have the money and the patience to jump through the Federal hoops and live in a state that allows the firearms, you can have whatever. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 05:37, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I doubt you could get a Remington ACR or an R11 RSASS at all as they are Remington Defence weapons and not sold to civilians, only to military and law enforcement. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:54, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Maybe they're trying to get to police procurement guys via their kid sons. "Come on dad, it'd be ''really'' cool if you bought this one!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:31, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::(*Slap*) "What have I told you about playing Call of Duty?! It's an unrealistic portrayal of firearms, now get back on the computer and play more America's Army!" (Disclaimer: This was merely for comedic purposes, IMFDB does *not* condone child abuse) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:50, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::(*Slap*) "What have I told you about playing America's Army?! The son of a Marine would never play this game, now get back on the computer and check if [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Days_in_Fallujah Six Days in Fallujah] is already out!" (Disclaimer: This was merely for comedic purposes, Marines and Soldiers are known for not liking being indistinguished) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:46, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::When did I indistinguish Soldiers and Marines? And sadly I doubt we'll be seeing Six Days on shelves any time soon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 03:24, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I didn't really comment in regards to that post, just needed something, for comedic purposes :)<br />
::::::::And indeed, the lack of any progress on game since 2010 is disappointing :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:17, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Believe me, I've been looking forward to Six Days for a while. The game is supposedly finished and ready to ship, but no publisher seems to have the balls to distribute it. It could become the ''Thrill Kill'' of shooter games (i.e., the "best fighting game you've never played", as it's so frequently referred to as). Funny how almost all of the criticism for it (as well as Medal of Honor 2010) came mostly from foreign entities. Yeah, the British and the Danish "disagree" with two games that revolve around the ''US'' military, but no one over there seems to have any problems with the SAS-starring Modern Warfare series. Kind of bizarre how that works out, huh? ;) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 18:51, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Medal of Honor was banned from selling in US Military Bases, wasn't it? But yes, the highly vocal boycotting of these 2 games, and not CoD: MWs, by British is really suspicious and looks more like propaganda stuff...<br />
::::::::::Should Atomic Games have gone indie with the game, the lack of publisher wouldn't be an obstacle :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:18, 28 February 2012 (CST)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3&diff=525514Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32012-02-27T13:17:25Z<p>Masterius: /* Always Wondered */</p>
<hr />
<div>See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] and [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 2]] for older discussions.<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==<br />
<br />
Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:<br />
<br />
It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::The thing is while commercials are not allowed, ''trailers'' usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly ''all'' having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
In my opinion, I would rather create a small section for the commercial instead of making a separate page for it in compliance with Imfdb rules. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:IMFDB rules say nothing about trailers, only commercials which are ''not'' trailers are forbidden. I'm saying create a sub-page for it since it would be ''way'' bigger than a "small section" if you did it properly, which is how it should be done. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:26, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet ([[Sam Worthington]]) loads up his ACR during the opening battle in New York City.]]<br />
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet then switches to his dual Skorpions during the first engagement.]]<br />
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in Germany, The n00b aims an RPG-7 at an enemy sniper, as The Vet looks on in disbelief at such a choice.]]<br />
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b now shows off the skills he's learned from The Vet.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b ([[Jonah Hill]]) realizes the mistake he's just made in pulling the pin from his M67 grenade prematurely in the opening battle in New York City.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet draws his dual Skorpions. Interestingly, there are no holsters for these weapons. This could be a sly joke about game mechanics; in the games, the player's second weapon is indeed shown stuck to their back with no visible means of attachment.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet now stares down at an attacking Mi-28 "Havoc" helicopter...]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...and dodges an incoming missile from the Havoc.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b charges onto the war-torn New York City streets in typical n00b fashion; spraying from the hip and yelling a war-cry like you're Arnold Schwarzenegger. Just like any typical n00b, he also "noob tubes".]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Unfortunately, The n00b forgot about one thing; watch out for hidden landmines!]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet sneak up on the enemy sniper during the battle in Germany.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Watch, and learn!" The Vet once again tries to show The n00b how to prepare for combat properly during the battle in Paris.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b learns what it's like to fight in zero gravity in a recreation of the mission "Turbulence".]] <br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Take a break big dog, I got this!" The n00b prepares to show that he's proven his worth on the battlefield.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in New York City, The n00b switches from his ACR to his M1911. Smart choice. Not bad for a n00b!]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b fires his M1911.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet walk side-by-side on the battlefield, as the trailer's tagline appears on the screen.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Another n00b ([[Dwight Howard]]) comes onto the battlefield, displaying the typical n00b mannerisms.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b whoops with joy after spraying the battlefield with his M16A2/M203 combo.]]<br />
<br />
== Unknown grenade ==<br />
<br />
Any idea what this is?<br />
<br />
[[Image:MW3-Gasgren-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
It's the gas grenade Price throws when he's interrogating Waarabe. Looks almost like a VOG grenade with a pin stuck on one end, or an M34 after a crash diet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:21, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Desert Eagle ==<br />
<br />
Now that's settled, Evil Tim, can you do the same treatment to the slide markings, as I think it might actually say Desert Hawk rather than Eagle, but don't have anything on this computer to clear it up. Can make out though that this is a Magnum Research as the bottom line ends in ''Minneapolis MN''. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:[http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/GMCMA/Other%20stuff/2011-11-25_00070.jpg This is a slightly different gradient mapping] (you can still see the E, it's the same image, on photobucket to save server space), but it actually looks like the second word is completely missing. I don't see why, they thank MR and "Desert Eagle" (which is a separate thing?) in the credits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Thanks, to me it look like it says either "Hank" or "Hawk" and am assuming Hawk, as that is less mental. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST) <br />
<br />
:Ok, ok, calming down now. Here's where we get back to fun because the magazine is both correctly and incorrectly modelled!<br />
<br />
:[[Image:MW3-Deagle-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
:Notice the spacing imples four holes in the magazine (a .44 would have 5) but the number of visible bullets I believe implies a .44 (a .50AE would only have three, unless the side of the top bullet at the side is supposed to be the side of the one at the ''top'' of the magazine). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]<br />
<br />
::Also, .44 Magnum is a rimmed caliber, and while I don't completely expect them to get this correct, the cartridges in the magazine are not rimmed, which would be characteristic of .50 AE rounds. Just a side note! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:14, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I think it is meant to be the .50 AE mag, but is thrown off by two thing. Firstly the top round is smaller than the other visible rounds, and looks like it overlaps the top one as well. Secondly, the window is too long on this gun, being about a 1/3 the total length of the magazine. On a real magazine (.44 or .50, they are the same apart from the holes) the window in only about 1/4 the length of the magazine. These two factors combined mean more bullets are visible than there should be. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::The mags are pretty much made up to be just something to stick into the gun. They are so far from the real thing they can't really even be credited towards either gun.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:31, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Well, the number of "windows" does tell you how many rounds, and the spacing says 4 rather than 5, so it's just another mistake with 8 rounds in a 7-round magazine. You want horrible magazines you need to go back to the original MW, if you were ''lucky'' you'd have two completely flat bullets on the top that looked a bit like they were for the right kind of gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, but a mag window never extends into the feed lips like in the picture. lol... And honestly, I never looked at the original MW mags. I'll take your word there.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:50, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Well, I'm probably going to redo those at some point because I hate that page. Also, the window does that, I imagine, because they're BS'ing based on an Airsoft magazine, where the feed lips are instead the plastic top of the mag with the BB feeder and gas vent. I guess they knew there was a hole in the side of the magazine (which on the Airsoft version isn't a hole but a dip containing a little latch that releases the slide and such), knew there were feed lips, but weren't sure how the two things interacted with each other. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:55, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Lol yea we'll just go with that explanation... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:58, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The top of the magazine is correct, and the windows does extend up into the feed lips like this. See here for a side by side comparison of both .50 and .44 magazines showing this: http://www.magnumresearch.com/docs/MagazineOffer.pdf. It also seems like the crimp on the front of the magazine is different for the two calibers, but you don't get a good enough look at the magazine to work out which, if either, the game magazine is based on. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Yeah, you're right, I just checked a couple more images on Google to be sure. I can't imagine that does much for the life of the feed lips? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:18, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::: Yeaaaaa That explains why I've heard that the lifespan of DE mags are so short... Ok then lol --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 21:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 16:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I prefer the MW2 Magnum Research .50AE Design, but with the 8-Round Magazine of the MW3 Deagle! What a pity that Infinity Ward hasn't introduced the Round-In-Chamber Feature yet, perhaps they will for Black Ops 2 or the Project Iron Wolf... <br />
Anyways, the .50 Action Express (7-Round Magazine+1) is one of the most powerful Handgun Caliber, but not easy to control; <br />
that's why I would rather use the .44 Magnum (8-Round Magazine+1) or the .357 Magnum (9-Round Magazine+1), with less recoil and higher accuracy."<br />
<br />
== Mk 14 ==<br />
<br />
So, I guess they just figured "nobody's going to throw their rifle on the floor and ''check'' it's the same one the other guys are using, right?" And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for us meddlin' kids. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
... what's the problem? --[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 04:51, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The "Mk14" and "M14 EBR" are actually the same model (the Mk 14 Mod 0), even though it seems they want you to think the "M14 EBR" is the Mk 14 Mod 1 from the previous game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:17, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Since it's locked... ==<br />
<br />
Can a mod change the bit about the M65 Atomic Annie?<br />
<br />
"A doctored image of the nuclear test Upshot-Knothole Grable can be seen in some maps as a movie poster. Grable was a shell fired from an M65 Atomic Cannon and the W9 nuclear artillery shell was itself a modified antiaircraft gun."<br />
<br />
Atomic Annie fired 280mm shells. There were never any 280mm AA shells, and the design of Atomic Annie itself was based on German railroad guns, not an AA gun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:49, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:You're misreading. The W9 round ''itself'' is a modified antiaircraft gun which fires one subcritical mass at the other. The M65 is a gun which fires a gun which is a bomb. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:32, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::If it's just a gun-type fission device, can you clarify that? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:35, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Just did that before reading. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:41, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Thanks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:47, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
How come the page is locked anyway? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:55, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Haven't checked the edit history so I might be wrong, but my guess is too many people being dicks toward the game just because it's extremely popular and therefore bashing it everywhere it's brought up is the cool thing to do. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] 21:39, 15 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Speaking of which, what do you guys think of changing one of the captions for the Mk 14 Mod 1 to this (italics are my addition):<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14-4.jpg|thumb|none|300px|"Soap" MacTavish holds his own Mk 14 Mod 1 EBR as Yuri wonders why he's the odd one out. ''Presumably the developers intended for Yuri to also use a Mod 1, but for whatever reason, it appears as a Mod 0 when dropped.'']]<br />
:That's my assumption, at least, but I don't know for sure (especially since it ''does'' use the old Mod 1 model in another mission). What do you think? <br />
<br />
:Oh and also, in the second sentence under Mk 14 Mod 1, there's an extraneous "the" in front of ''MW2'''s name. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] 23:43, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Strikes me that if anything it would be the other way around. The most likely answer is that the Mod 1 model was ganked from MW2 as a placeholder, yet again.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Pc_wallpaper_04_1024x768.png|thumb|none|600px|Promotional art of Soap from MW2; scope has flared eyepiece, no notched rings to the rear, stepped objective. Note also long rail covers on the handguard.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14Mod1-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Mod 1 model; same old scope and rail covers, plus the same rather chunky bipod hinge.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|MW3 scope model; note notched rings, shorter flared eyepiece, flared objective.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14Mod0-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Mod 0 model; new, MW3-style scope, shorter rail covers and different handguard, gripped magazine base (looks like a Magpul with no loop) not present on the MW2 model.]]<br />
<br />
Then they decided to go for a Mod 0 instead. And, as with a load of other weapons, they didn't bother to change some of the models that were actually in the game. The Mod 0 in "Goalpost" uses a variant MW3 scope model when you're holding it, but the MW2 world model when you drop it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:43, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
A quick query about the M4A1 used in the game, as you may be able to see in the pictures below the M4 is equipped with a rail riser, including when using the hybrid sight.<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3-M4-1.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3-M4-2.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
The EOTech XPS-3 part of the hybrid sight is situated on the lower rail whilst the magnifier is on the rail riser. Wouldn't this mess up the alignment between the two? Doesn't really look right to me but would like anyone else's input. --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 15:50, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:[[Image:MW3-M4-5.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
:If you zoom in and look carefully there's a silver plate between the base of the XPS-3 and the rail which raises it up to the same level as the riser. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:22, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Ah, thanks. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to though... --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 16:48, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's most likely that they designed the rifle before they decided to use this sight with it. A bit like how they just stuffed the RSASS into "Blood Brothers" even though the level was blatantly designed for the Barrett. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 16:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Like the Desert Eagle, I prefer the M4A1 from MW2, even if the one from MW3 looks much lighter... ."<br />
<br />
== "USP45 Tactical" ==<br />
<br />
I would just like to point out that the supposed USP Tactical isn't one; it still has the regular USP's fixed iron sights for one thing. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 05:33, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:And has markings on it saying "USP Tactical," plus an extended barrel. It's a USP Tactical with the wrong iron sights. This is hardly impossible, since the Tactical uses the same dovetails as the standard USP slide so there's no reason you couldn't swap irons.<br />
<br />
:[[Image:Whatdoesthissay.jpg]] [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
So? Every other USP in the series had said extended barrel, but we didn't call them Tacs. Plus it's not like they've ever used correct trades before. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 06:27, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Ok, let me just copy-paste what I said ''last'' time this came up, adding the CoD4 USP since I have that too now:<br />
<br />
:Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:<br />
:[[Image:MW1-USP-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP in ''CoD4''. ''Barely visible'' barrel, slide says "(HK logo or something like it) USP .45 Auto." This is a USP 45.]]<br />
:[[Image:MW3-Nottactical.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP from ''MW2'' in ''MW3''. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has ''very slightly'' visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45.]]<br />
:[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has ''highly'' visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.]]<br />
:The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP.<br />
:Let me just break this down:<br />
:*Someone decided they needed a new USP model.<br />
:*They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.<br />
:*They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.<br />
:*They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.<br />
:Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I imagine, given the shorter extended barrel, the LAM in the first game and the possibly recycled from dev model rear sights in the second, the CoD4 / MW2 USP was originally going to be a Mark 23, and they kept the old barrel on the model for some reason. This new one's is in proportion for a USP Tac, and it ''says'' it's a USP Tac on the slide (which is a distinguishing feature of a USP Tac, after all). This is enough to upgrade it from mistake to intent, and the sights aren't impossible to swap between models and so aren't distinctive of the non-Tac model. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Just beat me to it. Was going to say that the rear sight and the raised part of the slide it sits on, and the amount of barrel projection was from a Mark 23 as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:10, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 21:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"The main difference with the USP45 from MW2 is that now it has been cleared to the players the fact that the one from MW2, when equipped with the Suppressor, is the same gun from MW3; the USP45 Tactical has always a threaded barrel for quick attaching a Sound Suppressor, which the USP45 can't actually use... <br />
Summarizing, the USP45 from MW2 becomes the USP45 Tactical from MW3 when a Suppressor is attached!"<br />
<br />
== "MG36" ==<br />
<br />
This image is from the official H&K site.<br />
[[Image:G36K-2.jpg|thumb|none|450px|Just ignore the buttstock, willya.]]<br />
They list it as a G36K, even tho it has a longer barrel. Maybe H&K classifies these guns based on the handguard and vent holes. It would make sense, as the barrels are interchangeable. Thoughts? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 16:11, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Not sure the barrels are interchangeable, as the gas block would be in the wrong place. I suppose you could put the correspondingly longer piston on (not sure if this would work but lets assume it would) but then the piston would be exposed, with the front part of it along with the gas block sticking out the front of the handguard. It would be exposed to dirt and damage, and would look weird. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:52, 3 December 2011 (CST) <br />
H&K makes a LMG/support gunner version of the G36 (don't remember the exact name). It looks just like your photo but as far as I know it's usually outfitted with a 100 round drum magazine instead of the normal 30 rounder. The name "MG36" is really just made up so the poor sap playing this game that knows nothing about gun would immediately associate the MG with machine gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 16:33, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I can't really see how a weapon with a non-carbine barrel is still a carbine, personally. Though it would hardly be the first time HK's marketing spods were guilty of making things up as they go along. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Wait a minute, HK's page has the disclaimer "The pictures shown may differ from the original." Isn't that an aftermarket stock, for a start? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The barrel extends past the handguard by a similar amount (slightly less I think) as on a G36, but the G36 handguard is longer, meaning that this is actually an intermediate barrel between the 318mm barrel of the G36K and the 480mm barrel of the G36. I believe the origin of this variant was that it was submitted for Norwegian (I think) army trials, and it has something like a 16" barrel. It now goes by the name G36KV3 I think. The stock isn't an aftermarket one, I think it was designed by H&K for the Latvian army. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:00, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Did a bit more searching and found that it is a 15.4" barrel, and the variant also appears to go by G36CQB. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:04, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Ah, only place I'd ever seen that stock was on Airsoft gun pictures saying it was a G&P "KV style" stock. So, we're saying this is probably a 15.4" barrel G36K? I doubt this variant has existed long enough to have been in ''Far Cry'', mind, so we should probably leave that saying hybrid. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Apparently the G36CQB was listed in the HK Defence Weapons Systems Brochure from 2004 to 2006, so it is possible that this is what the [[Far Cry]] rifle is based on. This is 2nd hand info from the HK Pro forums so might be wrong though. Have also read that it was first introduced in the late 90s for the US market, but only 100 or so were made so these are rare. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::This G36K, the one with the wierd aftermarket sights on a C rail and that stock, was made for one country specifically, though I forget which one. As for the carbine issue Tim, a carbine is simply a shortened version of the original, it can be any length as long as it's shorter. If it's a Carbine of a Carbine it's a Sub-Carbine. Not makin this up :) G36K = Carbine and G36C = Sub-Carbine. M4A1 = Carbine and Mk 18 Mod 0 = Sub-Carbine. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:42, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Far Cry was march 2004, I wouldn't think they'd have time to stick a G36 variant that had existed for an absolute maximum of 3 months (and might not have existed at all yet) in the game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:51, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::All I could find was someone stating that it was in the 2004-2006 brochure, but could have appeared before this point. Like I said, the first versions of the G36CQB barrel appeared in the late 90s. It is probably more likely that they just made it up accidentally though. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:54, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::Ok, I'll add a note there and fix this when I get home, then. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::I have a copy of Soldier of Fortune magazine from October 2001 that says the 15.4 inch CQB barrel is an option--[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 20:53, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::Ah, CQB ''barrel'', that's starting to make sense. So this is a CQB barrel for the G36 that they marketed for the K under the same name, even though it made the K longer and therefore only helped you CQ if the B was using it as a lance. Also, if this can be fitted to the standard G36, might it be the cause of STALKER's short-barreled G36E? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:47, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::::Could be. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 07:26, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::::The G36 from STALKER is actually modelled after a SL8 converted into a G36 lookalike (can tell by the profiling at the back of the receiver with a serial number plate, the selector switch and aftermarket magazine well fitted into machined out lower receiver). As for the barrel, it looks more like a CQB than a K. The K has an open pronged flash hider (as opposed to the birdcage shown) which would protrude past the handguard on a full size G36 but none of the barrel itself would be visible. I'm going to copy this whole discussion over onto the [[Talk:Heckler & Koch G36|G36 talk page]], as I think it has reached the point that it is more relevant there than here. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:10, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Sorry I was out of this for so long guys. As far as I remember, the G36 uses a quick-change barrel system (eventually used the the ACR and SCAR). You could go from CQB barrel to MG barrel at the flip of a tab and twist of the barrel. H&K figured out over time that they could simply market the same gun with different barrels and people would pay for two guns instead of one and a second barrel. Yes, the people at H&K are some of the biggest jerks out there. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:54, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Or maybe you only wanted a full length G36 with a shorter barrel. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:16, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
The G36K pictured above is a G36KV of the Latvian armed forces. They use longer barrels (15 or so inches, I believe) on them than factory G36Ks. Here you can see one in A-Stan [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v101/He219/mpnet/hires_090318-A-1211m-002a.jpg]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:57, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Oakley Gloves==<br />
[[File:RSASS MW3 being loaded.jpg|thumb|none|300px|The black (Oakley?) gloves in question. Notice the great detailing in the gloves' pads and stitching by the MW3 engine.]]<br />
Slightly irrelevant from the realm of guns, but I know that Delta Force members use the tan Oakley Factory Pilot gloves, but what are the ones that Soap and Yuri use during their Prague raid? I would suppose they're just the black ones, but could someone please verify? --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>''<br />
:I don't think they are actually Oakley gloves. Rather than the hollow "O" that is on the first section of the finger of genuine Oakley gloves, these appear to have a plain solid stud, which you tend to find on cheaper Oakley rip-off gloves, so imagine that is what the actual gloves were modelled off of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:23, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I thought everyone seemed to have SIs? (or were supposed to, keeping in mind the knockoff point above) [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:19, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
During the Prague missions as well as Stronghold and Down The Rabbit Hole Yuri wears black Oakley Factory Pilot gloves. As far as his other missions where the gloves have the missing fingertips, they could just be a similar-looking generic model. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 02:24, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== More guns ==<br />
<br />
In MP on unlockable embelms and titles: a Bereta 92 Inox, slide of a 1911type gun, flintlock pistol + Mk2 grenade on achivment "Strike!". These needs to be added to page - Paul<br />
:+ kind of unrelated to this but it'd be noted that the ump STILL hold 32 bullets by default, and the CM901 holds 30 bullets, but I think it is suposed to be the .308 cal variant which holds only 20. - Paul<br />
: in SP theres a MP5 w/ slimline forearm and w/o magrelease paddle on a sign during the levl with the sandstorm. -Paul<br />
: On "Black Tuesday", the US troops that show up with the Stryker have M1911s holstered on the front of their tactical vests.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 00:42, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Some more guns are a Sig in Price's leg holster in 'Stronghold', as well as another gun I couldn't identitfy in 'Blood Brothers', in another one of Price's holster. It looked liked Grigg's Springfield from COD 4, except w/ textures looking like they were pulled from Half-life. -= [[User:Taedeezy|Taedeezy]] 4:10, 7 January 2012 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I'll be going through again to get these soonish. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:18, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Also, according to the COD wiki there is a usable "M9" (92SB) on the level Down the Rabbit Hole. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:37, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:::Listed with [citation needed], ie it's some kid mistaking the USP for an M9. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:39, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Price has a holstered USP in Stronghold, not a SIG. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 17:59, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Type-95 is a 97 ==<br />
<br />
When I played the game again, I noticed the Type 95 doesn't reload the same way and the mag looks like a 5.56 mag. And when it reloads, it inserts the mag instead of the hook style. And the world game model and the menu model is exactly like a 97. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:43, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Soap's P99==<br />
<br />
I just played through the PS3 version of the game again. It appears as though Soap draws a P99 in "Blood Brothers" while Price is carrying him to the safehouse. Can anyone else confirm this?-Glamdring<br />
<br />
:Yes, he does. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:20, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MP7 Mag ==<br />
<br />
I just noticed that the MP7's extended mag baseplate (it's not technically the base of the mag, but what else would you call it?) is actually stuck to the gun instead of the magazine itself. It's really obvious in the second screenshot in the MP7 entry. Can anyone confirm this and possibly add it to the page? --[[User:Don Bigles|Don Bigles]] 05:16, 2 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Ah, someone added it. Thanks. --[[User:Don Bigles|Don Bigles]] 05:35, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I can't find a JPG pic which the upload page says i need, so i can't show, but it seems the MP7 reloads with empty magazines (Google "Modern Warfare 3 MP7 Reload" on Google Images), is this worth adding?--[[User:Z008MJ|Z008MJ]] 07:06, 8 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It's not empty, it's solid. I'll add a pic later. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:54, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Always Wondered ==<br />
<br />
Why, in games such as this, are correct weapons names (Desert Eagle Mark XIX, Brügger & Thomet MP-9) used but in others they are called the "Falcon 357" or generic names like "Sniper Rifle"? Anyone? Bueller? [[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 09:49, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I guess it's because Activision can afford to cover the copyright costs, name infringement isn't free.<br />
<br />
:Yeah, it's a trademark issue. Most companies haven't trademarked the distinctive shape of their weapons (though Glock and HK have), but they have the names, and it's much easier to prove infringement on a name than on a shape anyway. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:45, 5 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Activision has more money. Other game companies don't. wonder how much money it cost them for those huge logos like remington and EOTech?--[[User:Coltmth|Coltmth]] 22:29, 5 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:I assumed in the logo cases it was the other way round, with the firearms companies paying Activision for the product placement. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:42, 6 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::It's funny when big-name firearms companies resort to product placement. Do they really expect the military officials to play such kind of games? Or does America nowadays allow the sales of military-grade firearms (like those Remington rifles) to civilian population? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::If you have the money and the patience to jump through the Federal hoops and live in a state that allows the firearms, you can have whatever. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 05:37, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I doubt you could get a Remington ACR or an R11 RSASS at all as they are Remington Defence weapons and not sold to civilians, only to military and law enforcement. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:54, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Maybe they're trying to get to police procurement guys via their kid sons. "Come on dad, it'd be ''really'' cool if you bought this one!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:31, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::(*Slap*) "What have I told you about playing Call of Duty?! It's an unrealistic portrayal of firearms, now get back on the computer and play more America's Army!" (Disclaimer: This was merely for comedic purposes, IMFDB does *not* condone child abuse) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:50, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::(*Slap*) "What have I told you about playing America's Army?! The son of a Marine would never play this game, now get back on the computer and check if [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Days_in_Fallujah Six Days in Fallujah] is already out!" (Disclaimer: This was merely for comedic purposes, Marines and Soldiers are known for not liking being indistinguished) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:46, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::When did I indistinguish Soldiers and Marines? And sadly I doubt we'll be seeing Six Days on shelves any time soon. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 03:24, 27 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I didn't really comment in regards to that post, just needed something, for comedic purposes :)<br />
::::::::And indeed, the lack of any progress on game since 2010 is disappointing :\ --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 07:17, 27 February 2012 (CST)</div>Masteriushttps://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3&diff=525470Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 32012-02-27T07:46:57Z<p>Masterius: /* Always Wondered */</p>
<hr />
<div>See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 1]] and [[Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3/Archive 2]] for older discussions.<br />
<br />
__TOC__<br />
<br />
== HD Screenshots from the MW3 Commercial ==<br />
<br />
Here's some screenshots from the MW3 Commercial starring [[Sam Worthington]] and [[Jonah Hill]]:<br />
<br />
It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::The thing is while commercials are not allowed, ''trailers'' usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly ''all'' having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)<br />
In my opinion, I would rather create a small section for the commercial instead of making a separate page for it in compliance with Imfdb rules. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 03:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:IMFDB rules say nothing about trailers, only commercials which are ''not'' trailers are forbidden. I'm saying create a sub-page for it since it would be ''way'' bigger than a "small section" if you did it properly, which is how it should be done. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:26, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3Com 01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet ([[Sam Worthington]]) loads up his ACR during the opening battle in New York City.]]<br />
[[File:MW3Com 03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet then switches to his dual Skorpions during the first engagement.]]<br />
[[File:MW3Com 05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in Germany, The n00b aims an RPG-7 at an enemy sniper, as The Vet looks on in disbelief at such a choice.]]<br />
^That one makes me laugh my ass off every time I look at it. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:41, 22 November 2011 (CST)<br />
[[File:MW3Com 12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b now shows off the skills he's learned from The Vet.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-01.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b ([[Jonah Hill]]) realizes the mistake he's just made in pulling the pin from his M67 grenade prematurely in the opening battle in New York City.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-02.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet draws his dual Skorpions. Interestingly, there are no holsters for these weapons. This could be a sly joke about game mechanics; in the games, the player's second weapon is indeed shown stuck to their back with no visible means of attachment.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-03.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Vet now stares down at an attacking Mi-28 "Havoc" helicopter...]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-04.jpg|thumb|none|600px|...and dodges an incoming missile from the Havoc.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-05.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b charges onto the war-torn New York City streets in typical n00b fashion; spraying from the hip and yelling a war-cry like you're Arnold Schwarzenegger. Just like any typical n00b, he also "noob tubes".]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-06.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Unfortunately, The n00b forgot about one thing; watch out for hidden landmines!]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-07.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet sneak up on the enemy sniper during the battle in Germany.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-08.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Watch, and learn!" The Vet once again tries to show The n00b how to prepare for combat properly during the battle in Paris.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-09.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b learns what it's like to fight in zero gravity in a recreation of the mission "Turbulence".]] <br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-11.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"Take a break big dog, I got this!" The n00b prepares to show that he's proven his worth on the battlefield.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-12.jpg|thumb|none|600px|During the battle in New York City, The n00b switches from his ACR to his M1911. Smart choice. Not bad for a n00b!]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-13.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b fires his M1911.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-14.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b and The Vet walk side-by-side on the battlefield, as the trailer's tagline appears on the screen.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-15.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Another n00b ([[Dwight Howard]]) comes onto the battlefield, displaying the typical n00b mannerisms.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3Noob-16.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The n00b whoops with joy after spraying the battlefield with his M16A2/M203 combo.]]<br />
<br />
== Unknown grenade ==<br />
<br />
Any idea what this is?<br />
<br />
[[Image:MW3-Gasgren-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
It's the gas grenade Price throws when he's interrogating Waarabe. Looks almost like a VOG grenade with a pin stuck on one end, or an M34 after a crash diet. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:21, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Desert Eagle ==<br />
<br />
Now that's settled, Evil Tim, can you do the same treatment to the slide markings, as I think it might actually say Desert Hawk rather than Eagle, but don't have anything on this computer to clear it up. Can make out though that this is a Magnum Research as the bottom line ends in ''Minneapolis MN''. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:[http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/GMCMA/Other%20stuff/2011-11-25_00070.jpg This is a slightly different gradient mapping] (you can still see the E, it's the same image, on photobucket to save server space), but it actually looks like the second word is completely missing. I don't see why, they thank MR and "Desert Eagle" (which is a separate thing?) in the credits. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::Thanks, to me it look like it says either "Hank" or "Hawk" and am assuming Hawk, as that is less mental. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST) <br />
<br />
:Ok, ok, calming down now. Here's where we get back to fun because the magazine is both correctly and incorrectly modelled!<br />
<br />
:[[Image:MW3-Deagle-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px]]<br />
<br />
:Notice the spacing imples four holes in the magazine (a .44 would have 5) but the number of visible bullets I believe implies a .44 (a .50AE would only have three, unless the side of the top bullet at the side is supposed to be the side of the one at the ''top'' of the magazine). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]]<br />
<br />
::Also, .44 Magnum is a rimmed caliber, and while I don't completely expect them to get this correct, the cartridges in the magazine are not rimmed, which would be characteristic of .50 AE rounds. Just a side note! --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 11:14, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I think it is meant to be the .50 AE mag, but is thrown off by two thing. Firstly the top round is smaller than the other visible rounds, and looks like it overlaps the top one as well. Secondly, the window is too long on this gun, being about a 1/3 the total length of the magazine. On a real magazine (.44 or .50, they are the same apart from the holes) the window in only about 1/4 the length of the magazine. These two factors combined mean more bullets are visible than there should be. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::The mags are pretty much made up to be just something to stick into the gun. They are so far from the real thing they can't really even be credited towards either gun.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:31, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::Well, the number of "windows" does tell you how many rounds, and the spacing says 4 rather than 5, so it's just another mistake with 8 rounds in a 7-round magazine. You want horrible magazines you need to go back to the original MW, if you were ''lucky'' you'd have two completely flat bullets on the top that looked a bit like they were for the right kind of gun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:37, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, but a mag window never extends into the feed lips like in the picture. lol... And honestly, I never looked at the original MW mags. I'll take your word there.--[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:50, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Well, I'm probably going to redo those at some point because I hate that page. Also, the window does that, I imagine, because they're BS'ing based on an Airsoft magazine, where the feed lips are instead the plastic top of the mag with the BB feeder and gas vent. I guess they knew there was a hole in the side of the magazine (which on the Airsoft version isn't a hole but a dip containing a little latch that releases the slide and such), knew there were feed lips, but weren't sure how the two things interacted with each other. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 15:55, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Lol yea we'll just go with that explanation... --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 15:58, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The top of the magazine is correct, and the windows does extend up into the feed lips like this. See here for a side by side comparison of both .50 and .44 magazines showing this: http://www.magnumresearch.com/docs/MagazineOffer.pdf. It also seems like the crimp on the front of the magazine is different for the two calibers, but you don't get a good enough look at the magazine to work out which, if either, the game magazine is based on. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Yeah, you're right, I just checked a couple more images on Google to be sure. I can't imagine that does much for the life of the feed lips? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:18, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::: Yeaaaaa That explains why I've heard that the lifespan of DE mags are so short... Ok then lol --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 21:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 16:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"I prefer the MW2 Magnum Research .50AE Design, but with the 8-Round Magazine of the MW3 Deagle! What a pity that Infinity Ward hasn't introduced the Round-In-Chamber Feature yet, perhaps they will for Black Ops 2 or the Project Iron Wolf... <br />
Anyways, the .50 Action Express (7-Round Magazine+1) is one of the most powerful Handgun Caliber, but not easy to control; <br />
that's why I would rather use the .44 Magnum (8-Round Magazine+1) or the .357 Magnum (9-Round Magazine+1), with less recoil and higher accuracy."<br />
<br />
== Mk 14 ==<br />
<br />
So, I guess they just figured "nobody's going to throw their rifle on the floor and ''check'' it's the same one the other guys are using, right?" And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for us meddlin' kids. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 25 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
... what's the problem? --[[User:Ghostdigga|Ghostdigga]] 04:51, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:The "Mk14" and "M14 EBR" are actually the same model (the Mk 14 Mod 0), even though it seems they want you to think the "M14 EBR" is the Mk 14 Mod 1 from the previous game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:17, 27 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Since it's locked... ==<br />
<br />
Can a mod change the bit about the M65 Atomic Annie?<br />
<br />
"A doctored image of the nuclear test Upshot-Knothole Grable can be seen in some maps as a movie poster. Grable was a shell fired from an M65 Atomic Cannon and the W9 nuclear artillery shell was itself a modified antiaircraft gun."<br />
<br />
Atomic Annie fired 280mm shells. There were never any 280mm AA shells, and the design of Atomic Annie itself was based on German railroad guns, not an AA gun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:49, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:You're misreading. The W9 round ''itself'' is a modified antiaircraft gun which fires one subcritical mass at the other. The M65 is a gun which fires a gun which is a bomb. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:32, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::If it's just a gun-type fission device, can you clarify that? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:35, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Just did that before reading. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:41, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Thanks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 11:47, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
How come the page is locked anyway? --[[User:RaNgeR|RaNgeR]] 10:55, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
:Haven't checked the edit history so I might be wrong, but my guess is too many people being dicks toward the game just because it's extremely popular and therefore bashing it everywhere it's brought up is the cool thing to do. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] 21:39, 15 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Speaking of which, what do you guys think of changing one of the captions for the Mk 14 Mod 1 to this (italics are my addition):<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14-4.jpg|thumb|none|300px|"Soap" MacTavish holds his own Mk 14 Mod 1 EBR as Yuri wonders why he's the odd one out. ''Presumably the developers intended for Yuri to also use a Mod 1, but for whatever reason, it appears as a Mod 0 when dropped.'']]<br />
:That's my assumption, at least, but I don't know for sure (especially since it ''does'' use the old Mod 1 model in another mission). What do you think? <br />
<br />
:Oh and also, in the second sentence under Mk 14 Mod 1, there's an extraneous "the" in front of ''MW2'''s name. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] 23:43, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Strikes me that if anything it would be the other way around. The most likely answer is that the Mod 1 model was ganked from MW2 as a placeholder, yet again.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Pc_wallpaper_04_1024x768.png|thumb|none|600px|Promotional art of Soap from MW2; scope has flared eyepiece, no notched rings to the rear, stepped objective. Note also long rail covers on the handguard.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14Mod1-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Mod 1 model; same old scope and rail covers, plus the same rather chunky bipod hinge.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|MW3 scope model; note notched rings, shorter flared eyepiece, flared objective.]]<br />
[[Image:MW3-Mk14Mod0-5.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Mod 0 model; new, MW3-style scope, shorter rail covers and different handguard, gripped magazine base (looks like a Magpul with no loop) not present on the MW2 model.]]<br />
<br />
Then they decided to go for a Mod 0 instead. And, as with a load of other weapons, they didn't bother to change some of the models that were actually in the game. The Mod 0 in "Goalpost" uses a variant MW3 scope model when you're holding it, but the MW2 world model when you drop it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:43, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== M4A1 ==<br />
<br />
A quick query about the M4A1 used in the game, as you may be able to see in the pictures below the M4 is equipped with a rail riser, including when using the hybrid sight.<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3-M4-1.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
[[File:MW3-M4-2.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
The EOTech XPS-3 part of the hybrid sight is situated on the lower rail whilst the magnifier is on the rail riser. Wouldn't this mess up the alignment between the two? Doesn't really look right to me but would like anyone else's input. --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 15:50, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:[[Image:MW3-M4-5.jpg|600px]]<br />
<br />
:If you zoom in and look carefully there's a silver plate between the base of the XPS-3 and the rail which raises it up to the same level as the riser. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:22, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Ah, thanks. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to though... --[[User:Noble.6|Noble.6]] 16:48, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::It's most likely that they designed the rifle before they decided to use this sight with it. A bit like how they just stuffed the RSASS into "Blood Brothers" even though the level was blatantly designed for the Barrett. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:52, 28 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 16:00, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"Like the Desert Eagle, I prefer the M4A1 from MW2, even if the one from MW3 looks much lighter... ."<br />
<br />
== "USP45 Tactical" ==<br />
<br />
I would just like to point out that the supposed USP Tactical isn't one; it still has the regular USP's fixed iron sights for one thing. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 05:33, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:And has markings on it saying "USP Tactical," plus an extended barrel. It's a USP Tactical with the wrong iron sights. This is hardly impossible, since the Tactical uses the same dovetails as the standard USP slide so there's no reason you couldn't swap irons.<br />
<br />
:[[Image:Whatdoesthissay.jpg]] [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 06:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
So? Every other USP in the series had said extended barrel, but we didn't call them Tacs. Plus it's not like they've ever used correct trades before. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 06:27, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Ok, let me just copy-paste what I said ''last'' time this came up, adding the CoD4 USP since I have that too now:<br />
<br />
:Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:<br />
:[[Image:MW1-USP-2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP in ''CoD4''. ''Barely visible'' barrel, slide says "(HK logo or something like it) USP .45 Auto." This is a USP 45.]]<br />
:[[Image:MW3-Nottactical.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Standard USP from ''MW2'' in ''MW3''. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has ''very slightly'' visible projecting barrel. This is a USP 45.]]<br />
:[[Image:MW3-USPTac-1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|USP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has ''highly'' visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.]]<br />
:The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP.<br />
:Let me just break this down:<br />
:*Someone decided they needed a new USP model.<br />
:*They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.<br />
:*They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.<br />
:*They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.<br />
:Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I imagine, given the shorter extended barrel, the LAM in the first game and the possibly recycled from dev model rear sights in the second, the CoD4 / MW2 USP was originally going to be a Mark 23, and they kept the old barrel on the model for some reason. This new one's is in proportion for a USP Tac, and it ''says'' it's a USP Tac on the slide (which is a distinguishing feature of a USP Tac, after all). This is enough to upgrade it from mistake to intent, and the sights aren't impossible to swap between models and so aren't distinctive of the non-Tac model. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::Just beat me to it. Was going to say that the rear sight and the raised part of the slide it sits on, and the amount of barrel projection was from a Mark 23 as well. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:10, 2 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[User:Scarlighter|Scarlighter]]<br />
Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 25 February 2012, 21:10, Italy (UTC+01:00):<br />
<br />
"The main difference with the USP45 from MW2 is that now it has been cleared to the players the fact that the one from MW2, when equipped with the Suppressor, is the same gun from MW3; the USP45 Tactical has always a threaded barrel for quick attaching a Sound Suppressor, which the USP45 can't actually use... <br />
Summarizing, the USP45 from MW2 becomes the USP45 Tactical from MW3 when a Suppressor is attached!"<br />
<br />
== "MG36" ==<br />
<br />
This image is from the official H&K site.<br />
[[Image:G36K-2.jpg|thumb|none|450px|Just ignore the buttstock, willya.]]<br />
They list it as a G36K, even tho it has a longer barrel. Maybe H&K classifies these guns based on the handguard and vent holes. It would make sense, as the barrels are interchangeable. Thoughts? - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 16:11, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:Not sure the barrels are interchangeable, as the gas block would be in the wrong place. I suppose you could put the correspondingly longer piston on (not sure if this would work but lets assume it would) but then the piston would be exposed, with the front part of it along with the gas block sticking out the front of the handguard. It would be exposed to dirt and damage, and would look weird. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:52, 3 December 2011 (CST) <br />
H&K makes a LMG/support gunner version of the G36 (don't remember the exact name). It looks just like your photo but as far as I know it's usually outfitted with a 100 round drum magazine instead of the normal 30 rounder. The name "MG36" is really just made up so the poor sap playing this game that knows nothing about gun would immediately associate the MG with machine gun. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 16:33, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:I can't really see how a weapon with a non-carbine barrel is still a carbine, personally. Though it would hardly be the first time HK's marketing spods were guilty of making things up as they go along. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:49, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Wait a minute, HK's page has the disclaimer "The pictures shown may differ from the original." Isn't that an aftermarket stock, for a start? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:58, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
::The barrel extends past the handguard by a similar amount (slightly less I think) as on a G36, but the G36 handguard is longer, meaning that this is actually an intermediate barrel between the 318mm barrel of the G36K and the 480mm barrel of the G36. I believe the origin of this variant was that it was submitted for Norwegian (I think) army trials, and it has something like a 16" barrel. It now goes by the name G36KV3 I think. The stock isn't an aftermarket one, I think it was designed by H&K for the Latvian army. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:00, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::Did a bit more searching and found that it is a 15.4" barrel, and the variant also appears to go by G36CQB. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:04, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::Ah, only place I'd ever seen that stock was on Airsoft gun pictures saying it was a G&P "KV style" stock. So, we're saying this is probably a 15.4" barrel G36K? I doubt this variant has existed long enough to have been in ''Far Cry'', mind, so we should probably leave that saying hybrid. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:16, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::Apparently the G36CQB was listed in the HK Defence Weapons Systems Brochure from 2004 to 2006, so it is possible that this is what the [[Far Cry]] rifle is based on. This is 2nd hand info from the HK Pro forums so might be wrong though. Have also read that it was first introduced in the late 90s for the US market, but only 100 or so were made so these are rare. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:31, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::This G36K, the one with the wierd aftermarket sights on a C rail and that stock, was made for one country specifically, though I forget which one. As for the carbine issue Tim, a carbine is simply a shortened version of the original, it can be any length as long as it's shorter. If it's a Carbine of a Carbine it's a Sub-Carbine. Not makin this up :) G36K = Carbine and G36C = Sub-Carbine. M4A1 = Carbine and Mk 18 Mod 0 = Sub-Carbine. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:42, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::Far Cry was march 2004, I wouldn't think they'd have time to stick a G36 variant that had existed for an absolute maximum of 3 months (and might not have existed at all yet) in the game. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 17:51, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::All I could find was someone stating that it was in the 2004-2006 brochure, but could have appeared before this point. Like I said, the first versions of the G36CQB barrel appeared in the late 90s. It is probably more likely that they just made it up accidentally though. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:54, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::Ok, I'll add a note there and fix this when I get home, then. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 18:02, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::I have a copy of Soldier of Fortune magazine from October 2001 that says the 15.4 inch CQB barrel is an option--[[User:Shadowkungfu|Shadowkungfu]] 20:53, 3 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::Ah, CQB ''barrel'', that's starting to make sense. So this is a CQB barrel for the G36 that they marketed for the K under the same name, even though it made the K longer and therefore only helped you CQ if the B was using it as a lance. Also, if this can be fitted to the standard G36, might it be the cause of STALKER's short-barreled G36E? [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:47, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
:::::::::::Could be. :| - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 07:26, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
::::::::::::The G36 from STALKER is actually modelled after a SL8 converted into a G36 lookalike (can tell by the profiling at the back of the receiver with a serial number plate, the selector switch and aftermarket magazine well fitted into machined out lower receiver). As for the barrel, it looks more like a CQB than a K. The K has an open pronged flash hider (as opposed to the birdcage shown) which would protrude past the handguard on a full size G36 but none of the barrel itself would be visible. I'm going to copy this whole discussion over onto the [[Talk:Heckler & Koch G36|G36 talk page]], as I think it has reached the point that it is more relevant there than here. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 18:10, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
Sorry I was out of this for so long guys. As far as I remember, the G36 uses a quick-change barrel system (eventually used the the ACR and SCAR). You could go from CQB barrel to MG barrel at the flip of a tab and twist of the barrel. H&K figured out over time that they could simply market the same gun with different barrels and people would pay for two guns instead of one and a second barrel. Yes, the people at H&K are some of the biggest jerks out there. --[[User:Ranger12|Ranger12]] 14:54, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
:Or maybe you only wanted a full length G36 with a shorter barrel. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:16, 4 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
The G36K pictured above is a G36KV of the Latvian armed forces. They use longer barrels (15 or so inches, I believe) on them than factory G36Ks. Here you can see one in A-Stan [http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v101/He219/mpnet/hires_090318-A-1211m-002a.jpg]. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 08:57, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Oakley Gloves==<br />
[[File:RSASS MW3 being loaded.jpg|thumb|none|300px|The black (Oakley?) gloves in question. Notice the great detailing in the gloves' pads and stitching by the MW3 engine.]]<br />
Slightly irrelevant from the realm of guns, but I know that Delta Force members use the tan Oakley Factory Pilot gloves, but what are the ones that Soap and Yuri use during their Prague raid? I would suppose they're just the black ones, but could someone please verify? --''[[User:Blemo|<span style="color: gray; font-family: georgia; font-size: 10pt;"><font color="#D3D3D3">'''B'''</font><font color="#A9A9A9">'''le'''</font><font color="#808080">'''mo'''</font></span>]] [[Image:Progress Wheel.gif]] <small><sup>[[user talk:Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''TALK'''</font>]]</sup></small> • <sub><small> [[Special:Contributions/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''CONTRIBUTIONS'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small>[[Special:Emailuser/Blemo|<font color="#A9A9A9">'''EMAIL'''</font>]]</small></sub> • <sub><small><font color="#A9A9A9"><span style="font-weight: light;" title="By the time you finish reading this hidden message, twelve nuclear warheads will have been launched toward your location. Thank you and have a nice day.">'''MESSAGE'''</span></font></small></sub>''<br />
:I don't think they are actually Oakley gloves. Rather than the hollow "O" that is on the first section of the finger of genuine Oakley gloves, these appear to have a plain solid stud, which you tend to find on cheaper Oakley rip-off gloves, so imagine that is what the actual gloves were modelled off of. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:23, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
I thought everyone seemed to have SIs? (or were supposed to, keeping in mind the knockoff point above) [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 08:19, 20 December 2011 (CST)<br />
<br />
During the Prague missions as well as Stronghold and Down The Rabbit Hole Yuri wears black Oakley Factory Pilot gloves. As far as his other missions where the gloves have the missing fingertips, they could just be a similar-looking generic model. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 02:24, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== More guns ==<br />
<br />
In MP on unlockable embelms and titles: a Bereta 92 Inox, slide of a 1911type gun, flintlock pistol + Mk2 grenade on achivment "Strike!". These needs to be added to page - Paul<br />
:+ kind of unrelated to this but it'd be noted that the ump STILL hold 32 bullets by default, and the CM901 holds 30 bullets, but I think it is suposed to be the .308 cal variant which holds only 20. - Paul<br />
: in SP theres a MP5 w/ slimline forearm and w/o magrelease paddle on a sign during the levl with the sandstorm. -Paul<br />
: On "Black Tuesday", the US troops that show up with the Stryker have M1911s holstered on the front of their tactical vests.--[[User:James Woods|James Woods]] 00:42, 2 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Some more guns are a Sig in Price's leg holster in 'Stronghold', as well as another gun I couldn't identitfy in 'Blood Brothers', in another one of Price's holster. It looked liked Grigg's Springfield from COD 4, except w/ textures looking like they were pulled from Half-life. -= [[User:Taedeezy|Taedeezy]] 4:10, 7 January 2012 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I'll be going through again to get these soonish. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:18, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Also, according to the COD wiki there is a usable "M9" (92SB) on the level Down the Rabbit Hole. --[[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 11:37, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
:::Listed with [citation needed], ie it's some kid mistaking the USP for an M9. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:39, 23 January 2012 (CST)<br />
::Price has a holstered USP in Stronghold, not a SIG. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 17:59, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Type-95 is a 97 ==<br />
<br />
When I played the game again, I noticed the Type 95 doesn't reload the same way and the mag looks like a 5.56 mag. And when it reloads, it inserts the mag instead of the hook style. And the world game model and the menu model is exactly like a 97. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:43, 22 January 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
==Soap's P99==<br />
<br />
I just played through the PS3 version of the game again. It appears as though Soap draws a P99 in "Blood Brothers" while Price is carrying him to the safehouse. Can anyone else confirm this?-Glamdring<br />
<br />
:Yes, he does. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 16:20, 1 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== MP7 Mag ==<br />
<br />
I just noticed that the MP7's extended mag baseplate (it's not technically the base of the mag, but what else would you call it?) is actually stuck to the gun instead of the magazine itself. It's really obvious in the second screenshot in the MP7 entry. Can anyone confirm this and possibly add it to the page? --[[User:Don Bigles|Don Bigles]] 05:16, 2 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Ah, someone added it. Thanks. --[[User:Don Bigles|Don Bigles]] 05:35, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I can't find a JPG pic which the upload page says i need, so i can't show, but it seems the MP7 reloads with empty magazines (Google "Modern Warfare 3 MP7 Reload" on Google Images), is this worth adding?--[[User:Z008MJ|Z008MJ]] 07:06, 8 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:It's not empty, it's solid. I'll add a pic later. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:54, 15 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
== Always Wondered ==<br />
<br />
Why, in games such as this, are correct weapons names (Desert Eagle Mark XIX, Brügger & Thomet MP-9) used but in others they are called the "Falcon 357" or generic names like "Sniper Rifle"? Anyone? Bueller? [[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 09:49, 4 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
I guess it's because Activision can afford to cover the copyright costs, name infringement isn't free.<br />
<br />
:Yeah, it's a trademark issue. Most companies haven't trademarked the distinctive shape of their weapons (though Glock and HK have), but they have the names, and it's much easier to prove infringement on a name than on a shape anyway. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 02:45, 5 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
Activision has more money. Other game companies don't. wonder how much money it cost them for those huge logos like remington and EOTech?--[[User:Coltmth|Coltmth]] 22:29, 5 February 2012 (CST)<br />
:I assumed in the logo cases it was the other way round, with the firearms companies paying Activision for the product placement. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 03:42, 6 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::It's funny when big-name firearms companies resort to product placement. Do they really expect the military officials to play such kind of games? Or does America nowadays allow the sales of military-grade firearms (like those Remington rifles) to civilian population? --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 02:20, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::If you have the money and the patience to jump through the Federal hoops and live in a state that allows the firearms, you can have whatever. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 05:37, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::I doubt you could get a Remington ACR or an R11 RSASS at all as they are Remington Defence weapons and not sold to civilians, only to military and law enforcement. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 05:54, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::Maybe they're trying to get to police procurement guys via their kid sons. "Come on dad, it'd be ''really'' cool if you bought this one!" [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 07:31, 14 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
:::::(*Slap*) "What have I told you about playing Call of Duty?! It's an unrealistic portrayal of firearms, now get back on the computer and play more America's Army!" (Disclaimer: This was merely for comedic purposes, IMFDB does *not* condone child abuse) [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:50, 26 February 2012 (CST)<br />
<br />
::::::(*Slap*) "What have I told you about playing America's Army?! The son of a Marine would never play this game, now get back on the computer and check if [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Days_in_Fallujah Six Days in Fallujah] is already out!" (Disclaimer: This was merely for comedic purposes, Marines and Soldiers are known for not liking being indistinguished) --[[User:Masterius|Masterius]] 01:46, 27 February 2012 (CST)</div>Masterius