I should of listen to Karda

[Jens Schuetz]

I feel like I'm on a merry go round here. The thing that comes to my mind most reading this thread is the immortal words of my least favorite woman in all the world. What difference does it make?

What my favorite professor would say. "It depends"
The guys we trained for Bosnia probably appreciated better weapons than an ancient P1. To me who never had to shoot anybody it shouldn't matter. But what if I have to next week? Should I own a pistol which gives me good groups without much training or the 60 year old model with which I would have to spend days at the range to get to an acceptable level?
Do you have different Kukris and Bowies suitable for different jobs or does the shape and weight not matter?
If indeed you just need one don't let the wife know. ;-)

 

[Scara]

What my favorite professor would say. "It depends"
The guys we trained for Bosnia probably appreciated better weapons than an ancient P1. To me who never had to shoot anybody it shouldn't matter. But what if I have to next week? Should I own a pistol which gives me good groups without much training or the 60 year old model with which I would have to spend days at the range to get to an acceptable level?
Do you have different Kukris and Bowies suitable for different jobs or does the shape and weight not matter?
If indeed you just need one don't let the wife know. ;-)

I think he was asking if the endless debate really matters, not commenting on the merits of the different arguments.

 

[Jens Schuetz]

I think he was asking if the endless debate really matters, not commenting on the merits of the different arguments.

Debates. Hmm. Whoever takes part in it probably wants to test his hypothesis and see if theres some good evidence for or against it, if his assumptions and observations have merit or were just flukes or wrongly interpreted and so on.
Sometimes it takes a bit longer and sometimes there are insults but it's all good with me.
Any idea how it can be made more enjoyable for you?

 

[Shavru]

LoL, So here is my actual take on the subject.
I would always prefer the best gear FOR the situation with the best person trained in it's use and that is always my first choice. However if I have to pick from the list of
1) best trained but seriously under equipped person
or 2) seriously under trained but best equipped person
I will ALWAYS choose the better trained person. I will bet that if I place a completely untrained person with a M107 in 2 square miles of woods and Give JW a 2lb billet of steel a forge and hammer I would put all my money on JW for the win.

 

[cul4u01]

LoL, So here is my actual take on the subject.
I would always prefer the best gear FOR the situation with the best person trained in it's use and that is always my first choice. However if I have to pick from the list of
1) best trained but seriously under equipped person
or 2) seriously under trained but best equipped person
I will ALWAYS choose the better trained person. I will bet that if I place a completely untrained person with a M107 in 2 square miles of woods and Give JW a 2lb billet of steel a forge and hammer I would put all my money on JW for the win.

:thumbup:

 

[Jens Schuetz]

Ah Shavru,
JW doesn't need a forge. He builds one himself and even the ore extraction isn't an issue for him. But sadly there aren't many JWs out there.

Equipment made just such a big difference many times that I would still prefer better equipment.

Once at night we had a platoon of experienced guys sneaking up on our platoons position. That's all these guys do to show newbies like us how bad we are and how to improve. So they were good, avoided and disabled our noise traps, cut through our razor barb wires and made no sound moving through a forest with twigs and leaves on the ground. We knew they were coming but not when and from where.
Moving without a sound in the dark they would have overwhelmed us easily until our platoon leader gave every of our 5 units his privately owned night vision goggles. Once we spotted the (more trained and skilled guys) we drove away and dropped virtual mortar fire on our previous position.
Night vision rules. Even if we hadn't been trained to use it and the other guys were more skilled in everything we won due to a few hundred bucks worth of goggles.
Guess you'd have lost some money and the only slightly under equipped highly skilled guys their lives. :-(

Maybe grandpa with a Stinger and a few hours training can shoot down more attack helicopters than Rambo with 10 years of archery training and an Arrow?

So yeah in extreme cases both points are valid. A good weapon can compensate for lack of experience and skill and a good shooter can still tickle some good performance out of a bad piece.

Now the problem is in real life its hard to switch the men. You get some recruits assigned and thats it. Some really bad ones can be transferred to a guard platoon but still I can't change myself or my guys into JWs in a few weeks so it would be more effective to give them good equipment to compensate.

 

[Cato]

Even for that a technological solution exists - bonded bullets that rely on expansion rather than fragmentation. They are barrier blind too. See docgkr's work.


[quote name="Bawanna"
I wasn't talking about you buddy. I should of replied with a quote lol. You r right about the 5.56 taking over. The only issue is penetration and fragmentation at distances over 75 yards due to the reduced velocities from short barrels<br/>

 

[gurkha berserka]

I do .45-2 7/8". In common speak: .45-110. I've hit right at 2500 yds.

Wow Bookie! That is one hell of a load and I am sure it kicks like a mule lol. Do you use standard black powder or AAA? I love seeing those big heavy bullets hit targets at that distance. The velocity is kind of slow by todays standards but its fun to lob a big ole piece of lead into a target at great distance. The .45-110 is a super cartridge, I think it was what Tom Sellek used in Quigily Down Under. That is a frigging awesome movie but I am sure you have seen it being a Sharps fan. I love the Sharps rifle and everything about it. It was and still is a accurate and beautiful rifle. I would LOVE to see some pics if you have any.

 

[gurkha berserka]

So how do you explain then that there are 20 more or less novice guys who don't hit anything with a P1 golfclub but hit everything with an Uzi golf club?
Oh you explain that in your second post.
The Uzi is a different class of golf club.
Even if it shoots the same 9mm golf balls, at the same target, in single shots it hits much better even with the same shooter.
My point exactly. Weapons do matter a lot. Call it different class. Still one works better the other one doesn't.
Wanna stay in the same class? Why is my MP9 HK that much better than a P1 Walther. Same shooter after all.

Couldn't that apply to knifes as well? In an open field you might be able to destroy more opponents with a light long sword than a short heavy one. No matter if you are new or experienced it should improve your odds. No?

If you really want to know you could just ask instead of trying to belittle me by implying computer game knowledge.
We used the normal Uzi. Most guys in our m113 made mortar tanks had P1 in adition to the G3. The gunner had an Uzi. Had to disassemble/assemble it blindfolded and with gas mask and all the little games you probably know too from your service.

No idea why you intend to provoke or question me? Do you want to distract from a flawed logic? Or do you need some pics? Just ask, however I would have to scan them first and black out license plates and faces.

But even then the point stands with one weapon we hit nothing and with the other one all the time.

Kukri nut?
Astk and other heavy weights perform much better in chopping big hard wood than my lighter Kvluk for example. How? If it's just the man and not the tool?
Now if different Kukris fair vastly different at chopping wood isn't it logical that different Kuks would perform very very differently in a fight against soft targets? Think for example about weight, reach, pointyness, concealability, deployment speed

You are comparing apples and oranges. You still haven't told me what mode Uzi. The Uzi is a smg, the P1 is a pistol. You shoulder fire a smg uzi but you don't shoulder a handgun. Of course people can and will do better with a smg/rifle than with a pistol. That's just common sense. The Uzi is a +6 or 7lbs sub machine gun, The P1 is a obsolete pistol from WWII so I'm not even sure where you are using it. You aren't even making sense which leads me to believe you are talking about video games. No military or police force use the P1 now which is just a P38. I might be wrong if you are in your 60's or 70's and you are referring to guns in the WWII or slightly later time period.

Seriously man you cant compare a 7lbs submachine gun to a obsolete pistol from WWII. Its like saying "I can it targets better with a rifle than with a pistol". Duh... no crap that's shooting 101. Pistols are by far the hardest firearm to learn and shoot well. There are so many variables that come in to play that don't matter with a rifle or sub machine gun. You can shoulder a submachine gun, and cant shoulder a P1 so its apples and oranges. Anyone will shoot a shoulder fired weapon better than a pistol even a 6 year old. Im not talking video games Im talking real guns.

So what model Uzi are you referring to? Please let me know because Germany doesn't and hasn't ever used the Uzi, they have the MP5 and UMP. The Uzi HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM THE MILITARY IN 1967 FROM ISREAL DUE TO ITS POOR DESIGN.

I hope Im not coming off to harsh man. I still enjoy our discussions and like I said earlier we can agree to disagree. I am a khuk nut to and didn't mean it as an insult.

 

[J W Bensinger]

The Germans used the P1 up until 2000-and if the P1 is obsolete, then the HP Browning and 1911 are also "obsolete" (which will disappoint MARSOC and some tier one guys I met)-as is Bookie's Sharps (just stand 2501 or 2 yards away when you tell him).

 

[gurkha berserka]

Even for that a technological solution exists - bonded bullets that rely on expansion rather than fragmentation. They are barrier blind too. See docgkr's work.


I have been doing a little research on those rounds and they look promising. So do the "powerball" pistol loads that have a polymer ball under the copper jacket. Its good for places that don't want hollow points but where you need expansion.

 

[gurkha berserka]

The Germans used the P1 up until 2000-and if the P1 is obsolete, then the HP Browning and 1911 are also "obsolete" (which will disappoint MARSOC and some tier one guys I met)-as is Bookie's Sharps (just stand 2501 or 2 yards away when you tell him).

The 1911 and browning hi power are still viable designs which can been seen by the multitude of manufacturers. The P1 is obsolete and has been obsolete for years. I wonder if we are taking the same P1, which is just a P38. I know Walther may have made an updated model and called it the P1 but if its the P1 Im thinking of than its just a P38. The operating system is dead unlike the falling link of the 1911 which is still used in many pistols. I prefer the 1911 to almost any handgun, it was ahead of its time for its day. John Browning is my favorite firearms designer next to M. Kalishnikov. The 1911 is rare animal that has lasted through the decades. I myself think the military should of never switched to the Berretta in 1985. They should of stuck with the 1911. My argument/discussion with Jens has more to do with comparing a P1 with a Uzi being then are two different animals. You cant compare a shoulder capable smg with a handgun. The Hi power is great but never caught on in the American market like it did in Europe.

The P1 and 1911/Hi power are two very different animals as well. The 1911 and Hi power share similar tilting barrel systems. The P1 uses a falling block which is both obsolete and dangerous. The Berretta M9 uses a similar falling block and the Navy Seals refuse to use it because of its poor design. Seals were getting inured badly due to catastrophic slide failures. They had to update the design and strengthen the block. They also installed a pin to stop the slide from flying backwards off the gun and hitting the shooter in the face. The newer Berretta's still have these slide failures but the pin stops the slide from coming off in your face. The Seals still refuse to use them in favor of Sigs. The P1 is was and will always be an obsolete design that should never be used in the same sentence as the 1911 or Hi Power buddy! One thing I know is guns, especially modern. Yes Bookie's Sharps in obsolete in the military sense but not the sporting sense. I will debate guns their history and uses all day long. Just my opinion.

 

[J W Bensinger]

In the sense that they fire the same cartridge, and (to quote Col. Cooper) "deliver the same blow", it's not an invalid comparison, especially from a military perspective where they are often issued to fill the same role-that of a PDW for non-infantry roles.
Don't get me wrong on this next bit-I hated the M9-but those slide failures were the result of a LOT of rounds through those pistols, and NATO spec subgun ammo at that. They should have spec'd that in the army trials, but that's Big Army for ya.
The P1/P38 is not ideal-low mag capacity for a 9mm, brutal DA pull, heel mag release-but if a service pistol runs right, has enough mags available, and hits where you point it I'm really ok with it. When we shot the Shutzenschnurr (sorry for the egregious spelling Jens lol) with the Pz/gren unit up near Pristina they had just been issued the HK usp DA 9mm (can't remember the German military designation) and a LOT of guys couldn't hit the ground with those either-because pistols, no matter how comforting, are pretty irrelevant to infantry on a mission accomplishment basis. The Uzi is easier to shoot-but the panzergrenadier unit we shot with ran G36's, some G3 DM rifles, and I'd bet those uzis have been replaced by shorty G36's. BTW 5.56 out of a 12" still will tear up body armor, better than 7.62x39-and we had local national troops take AK wounds that were just through and through, return-to-duty wounds. All depends on what's hit and the ammunition. Boattail AK tends to zip right through without tumbling-like SS109.

 

[J W Bensinger]

Doubletap

 

[Jens Schuetz]

You are comparing apples and oranges. You still haven't told me what mode Uzi. The Uzi is a smg, the P1 is a pistol. You shoulder fire a smg uzi but you don't shoulder a handgun. Of course people can and will do better with a smg/rifle than with a pistol. That's just common sense. The Uzi is a +6 or 7lbs sub machine gun, The P1 is a obsolete pistol from WWII so I'm not even sure where you are using it. You aren't even making sense which leads me to believe you are talking about video games. No military or police force use the P1 now which is just a P38. I might be wrong if you are in your 60's or 70's and you are referring to guns in the WWII or slightly later time period.

Seriously man you cant compare a 7lbs submachine gun to a obsolete pistol from WWII. Its like saying "I can it targets better with a rifle than with a pistol". Duh... no crap that's shooting 101. Pistols are by far the hardest firearm to learn and shoot well. There are so many variables that come in to play that don't matter with a rifle or sub machine gun. You can shoulder a submachine gun, and cant shoulder a P1 so its apples and oranges. Anyone will shoot a shoulder fired weapon better than a pistol even a 6 year old. Im not talking video games Im talking real guns.

So what model Uzi are you referring to? Please let me know because Germany doesn't and hasn't ever used the Uzi, they have the MP5 and UMP. The Uzi HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM THE MILITARY IN 1967 FROM ISREAL DUE TO ITS POOR DESIGN.

I hope Im not coming off to harsh man. I still enjoy our discussions and like I said earlier we can agree to disagree. I am a khuk nut to and didn't mean it as an insult.

Hm you are leaving half my questions unanswered. Why is my MP9 so much better than a P1 if the same guy is shooting it? I wonder why you got stuck on this Uzi thing? And even there its a much better gun which you deny is important since according to you only the shooter matters, not the kind of weapon. You describe your Uzi as shoulder supportable and that's the big difference? So shoulder support makes a bigger difference than the shooter? Interesting. Ours btw had no shoulder support. I have seen them only on some military police Uzis.

I guess you aren't that much of an expert in history or the curently weapons in use. The Mp1a2 Uzi was used in the German Army since 1959 until today. The P1/P38 since 1955 and still in use in some units until today. Since 1955 is only the current Army the previous one used it even earlier until 1945. And in between there wasn't any German Army to talk off.
I left the army in 1998. We talked a lot about new machine pistols and pistols back then but we never got them. The new G36 assault rifle however improved our aim drastically over the old G3 which you also ignored in your reply. Modern weapons make it sooo much easier to hit that it would be a crime not to use them. In my opinion and from what I have observed.

 

[Scara]

You are comparing apples and oranges. You still haven't told me what mode Uzi. The Uzi is a smg, the P1 is a pistol. You shoulder fire a smg uzi but you don't shoulder a handgun. Of course people can and will do better with a smg/rifle than with a pistol. That's just common sense. The Uzi is a +6 or 7lbs sub machine gun, The P1 is a obsolete pistol from WWII so I'm not even sure where you are using it. You aren't even making sense which leads me to believe you are talking about video games. No military or police force use the P1 now which is just a P38. I might be wrong if you are in your 60's or 70's and you are referring to guns in the WWII or slightly later time period.

Seriously man you cant compare a 7lbs submachine gun to a obsolete pistol from WWII. Its like saying "I can it targets better with a rifle than with a pistol". Duh... no crap that's shooting 101. Pistols are by far the hardest firearm to learn and shoot well. There are so many variables that come in to play that don't matter with a rifle or sub machine gun. You can shoulder a submachine gun, and cant shoulder a P1 so its apples and oranges. Anyone will shoot a shoulder fired weapon better than a pistol even a 6 year old. Im not talking video games Im talking real guns.

So what model Uzi are you referring to? Please let me know because Germany doesn't and hasn't ever used the Uzi, they have the MP5 and UMP. The Uzi HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM THE MILITARY IN 1967 FROM ISREAL DUE TO ITS POOR DESIGN.

I hope Im not coming off to harsh man. I still enjoy our discussions and like I said earlier we can agree to disagree. I am a khuk nut to and didn't mean it as an insult.

Gurkha, the German military did use the Uzi prior to the development of the MP5, and they used the full-sized original version. And he referred to the normal Uzi, which does give the impression of the original full-sized version.

So, if no one minds me asking, what side in the argument are you taking? I think I understand Jens' argument's summation being "So yeah in extreme cases both points are valid. A good weapon can compensate for lack of experience and skill and a good shooter can still tickle some good performance out of a bad piece."

But Gurkha, what exactly is your argument? Not to be rude to anyone, but I've been trying to follow this argument, but each time I try I hit a disconnect and can't follow the line.

 

[gurkha berserka]

In the sense that they fire the same cartridge, and (to quote Col. Cooper) "deliver the same blow", it's not an invalid comparison, especially from a military perspective where they are often issued to fill the same role-that of a PDW for non-infantry roles.
Don't get me wrong on this next bit-I hated the M9-but those slide failures were the result of a LOT of rounds through those pistols, and NATO spec subgun ammo at that. They should have spec'd that in the army trials, but that's Big Army for ya.
The P1/P38 is not ideal-low mag capacity for a 9mm, brutal DA pull, heel mag release-but if a service pistol runs right, has enough mags available, and hits where you point it I'm really ok with it. When we shot the Shutzenschnurr (sorry for the egregious spelling Jens lol) with the Pz/gren unit up near Pristina they had just been issued the HK usp DA 9mm (can't remember the German military designation) and a LOT of guys couldn't hit the ground with those either-because pistols, no matter how comforting, are pretty irrelevant to infantry on a mission accomplishment basis. The Uzi is easier to shoot-but the panzergrenadier unit we shot with ran G36's, some G3 DM rifles, and I'd bet those uzis have been replaced by shorty G36's. BTW 5.56 out of a 12" still will tear up body armor, better than 7.62x39-and we had local national troops take AK wounds that were just through and through, return-to-duty wounds. All depends on what's hit and the ammunition. Boattail AK tends to zip right through without tumbling-like SS109.

Ahhh... Now your speaking my lingo and I am glad you know who good ole Col Cooper is. Im still looking for a good deal on one of his scout rifles. I think the round count on the m9's was 250,000 befor the slide failure which isn't bad but I still prefer Brownings designs. Every modern handgun can owe its design to his tilting barrel design whether it had a link like the 1911 or solid tilting barrel of the Hipower which happens to be my second favorite handgun design of all time.

I built myself a kills 1911, I will take some pictures tonight of all the internal upgrades and make a post explaining everything. Im glad there are others interested in its design. I think my debate with Jens has gone way off topic. I was just trying to say its the fight in the dog and not the dog in the fight.

I have a m9 as well and will take pics of the falling block action to illustrate our conversation. The SS109 round is nice but I still prefer the m193 for soft targets. I would rather have a 30 cal through and through wound than a 22 any day of the eek lol. I also find the Soviet 5.54x39mm superior to the 5.56mm due to its projectile and its hollow cavity that aids in tumbling at lower velocities.

 

[gurkha berserka]

Gurkha, the German military did use the Uzi prior to the development of the MP5, and they used the full-sized original version. And he referred to the normal Uzi, which does give the impression of the original full-sized version.

So, if no one minds me asking, what side in the argument are you taking? I think I understand Jens' argument's summation being "So yeah in extreme cases both points are valid. A good weapon can compensate for lack of experience and skill and a good shooter can still tickle some good performance out of a bad piece."

But Gurkha, what exactly is your argument? Not to be rude to anyone, but I've been trying to follow this argument, but each time I try I hit a disconnect and can't follow the line.

I know we got a bit off topic. I got locked into the debate comparing a full size Uzi smg and a P1 pistol. It was apples to oranges and i felt it was a poor example because anyone will do better with a shoulder fired weapon.

I also understand that equipment cam and does help but IMHO its not the deciding factor. It's the fight in the dog and not the dog in the fight is what I was saying before we got off topic. I have shot competitively with handguns for decades. There are alot of new shooters that think they need the best equipment which isn't true. I and other shooters can routinely out shoot newbies no matter what equipment they have. Equipment is important but not with new shooters. It takes experience to get the most put of performance equipment. A new pair of skies, or shiny new golf clubs, or the best handgun wont make a better participant. Practicing ones skill has the greatest impact.

The full size Uzi he is talking about does have a shoulder stock so I am still confused. I own 3 G3's and they are defiantly harder than the G36 due the the porky 10lbs G3 and its horrible delayed roller locking recoil system. I may not be a expert on what country fielded what weapons and when but I am pretty knowledgable when it comes modern firearms, their operating systems and uses. That's why I got locked into the Uzi argement

 

[moparsbob]

I do .45-2 7/8". In common speak: .45-110. I've hit right at 2500 yds.

Hi Bookie, I'm curious - did you make your Sharps .45-2 7/8" yourself? If so, I'd love to see a picture of it. Your work is just incredible!

 

[Jens Schuetz]

I know we got a bit off topic. I got locked into the debate comparing a full size Uzi smg and a P1 pistol. It was apples to oranges and i felt it was a poor example because anyone will do better with a shoulder fired weapon.

I also understand that equipment cam and does help but IMHO its not the deciding factor. It's the fight in the dog and not the dog in the fight is what I was saying before we got off topic. I have shot competitively with handguns for decades. There are alot of new shooters that think they need the best equipment which isn't true. I and other shooters can routinely out shoot newbies no matter what equipment they have. Equipment is important but not with new shooters. It takes experience to get the most put of performance equipment. A new pair of skies, or shiny new golf clubs, or the best handgun wont make a better participant. Practicing ones skill has the greatest impact.

The full size Uzi he is talking about does have a shoulder stock so I am still confused. I own 3 G3's and they are defiantly harder than the G36 due the the porky 10lbs G3 and its horrible delayed roller locking recoil system. I may not be a expert on what country fielded what weapons and when but I am pretty knowledgable when it comes modern firearms, their operating systems and uses. That's why I got locked into the Uzi argement

You out shoot newbies. Nice. I could beat 10 kindergarteners with a Nerfsword while they have a full size Katana. What does it tell you about the Nerfsword or the Men? Nothing.

It's always a good idea to isolate factors so as few as possible are left and it's easier to see what's going on.

A good way to see the difference a weapon can make is to let the same kind of guys use different weapons.
(I've seen a lot lot lot of difference in Newbies and myself)

A good way to see what difference experience can make is to let the same weapons be used by differently experienced guys.
(That's what you've seen)

Conclusion?
The same shooter with a drastically better gun will shoot drastically better.
The same gun with a drastically more skilled shooter will perform drastically better.
My additional point, you usually can't change the men as easily so I'd start with the thing which makes more difference and fast.


I believe the only debate left is the extremes.

Would soldiers already serving 4 years with flint stock rifles beat new recruits wielding M16s in an open field battle? New recruits as in they already had an hour to know how to aim and pull the trigger and where the magazine goes.
I believe at some point the difference between equipments becomes so big that it overrides the difference experience can make. Nightvision being only one such disruptive technology.
Of course there can be a few individuals on the planet who are so skilled and tough they beat regular troops armed to the teeth with their bare hands. Kind of cool and we all want to be that guy from the movies but is that the rule or the exception?
Can recruits be so bad they don't hit anything even with the best weapon? Yes. But from what I've seen thats about 1-2 out of 20. So not really the rule.

Or back to the dogs.
Can a dog without teeth and lots of fight usually beat a dog with teeth and less fight.
Can a dog with dull teeth and fight still not beat the stronger dog with sharp teeth and less fight?
Wouldn't you bet your money on a dog with sharp teeth and normal fight over a toothless dog with more fight?


Also sorry for calling you less than an expert. I mean you used just common sense. You are right, who in their right mind would still use a P1 or an Uzi? Budget constraints. I heard from the News of 2014 the German Navy has only one helicopter able to fly. Kind of not being able to fulfil the Nato contracts in a worse case scenario is a bit embarrassing. I bet Putin likes it for his guys seem to have more fight and working equipment.